Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mature (The King of Fighters)
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The result was delete as failing WP:FICT and WP:RS. Bearian (talk) 22:41, 26 November 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Mature (The King of Fighters)
Lacks real world notability. No secondary sources cited, solely plot information from a game and only an in universe context. In addition to these problems, the article was tagged as unsourced in March and no sources have been located. Bbwlover (talk) 03:16, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
- Keep: Character is more notable than Angel (The King of Fighters), a character from the same series that is currently a GA and being used as an example at Wikipedia:WikiProject Video games/Cleanup. Suggest cleanup, not deletion.--SeizureDog (talk) 03:24, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
- Comment: See WP:WAX. - Rjd0060 (talk) 04:41, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
- The point is that real world notability is just as possible with this character as it is the other. Deletion is not based on how the article is, but how it could/should be.--SeizureDog (talk) 05:11, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
- I know that, so think of it this way: If all of the unsourced content is removed, and the unnecessary plot info is removed, there would be nothing left. - Rjd0060 (talk) 05:12, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
- No, what we would have is a stub. --SeizureDog (talk) 05:40, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
- You could call it that, or you could call it speedy-deletable. It just depends on what would be left. Luckily, we don't really have to play the "what-if" game with this one ;). - Rjd0060 (talk) 05:46, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
- I'm not sure what you mean by that "what-if game" comment. I've cleaned up the article to include a Development section. While small at the moment, it is can be expanded. Besides, AFD isn't clean-up.--SeizureDog (talk) 06:34, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
- You could call it that, or you could call it speedy-deletable. It just depends on what would be left. Luckily, we don't really have to play the "what-if" game with this one ;). - Rjd0060 (talk) 05:46, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
- No, what we would have is a stub. --SeizureDog (talk) 05:40, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
- I know that, so think of it this way: If all of the unsourced content is removed, and the unnecessary plot info is removed, there would be nothing left. - Rjd0060 (talk) 05:12, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
- The point is that real world notability is just as possible with this character as it is the other. Deletion is not based on how the article is, but how it could/should be.--SeizureDog (talk) 05:11, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
- Comment: See WP:WAX. - Rjd0060 (talk) 04:41, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
- Delete: No sources and it is plot info, but it isn't notable anyways. If it is important to the game, then merge into the games article, but no need for a separate one. - Rjd0060 (talk) 04:41, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
- Delete is see no evidence of the "extensive coverage" in reliable sources independent of the subject it's self. Without sources analyzing the larger meaning of this "in universe" character in the manner of a secondary source, there is no encyclopedic content, merely fan cruft. This article fails the standards set by WP:N and ought to be deleted. Pete.Hurd (talk) 06:49, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
- Merge then Delete Their is already a parent article, which lists some characters, why do we need to waste so many resources on single pages, for minor game characters, which we take the long view, are probably only going to be read by specialists in the field, infrequently, once or twice a year maybe. scope_creep (talk) 19:01, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
-
- COmment "Merge and delete" is invalid under the GFDL. --Dhartung | Talk 19:18, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
- Deleting the article does not free up any system resources and being "just for specialists" is not a valid arugument for deletion.--SeizureDog (talk) 00:10, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
- Delete as per nom. RMHED (talk) 22:37, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
- Merge Since there is a list of characters for this subject why not merge the relevent bits to there? Æon Insanity Now! 22:51, 21 November 2007 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been added to the list of video game deletions. Someone another (talk) 14:00, 22 November 2007 (UTC)
- Delete Per nom, in this case. • Lawrence Cohen 23:01, 25 November 2007 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
