Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Moonblade
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 --JForget 01:06, 16 November 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Moonblade
Failed PROD due to same editor removing multiple random prods. Original Prod note: Non-notable fictional object. Collectonian 20:02, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
- Keep: notable, Wikipedia is not supposed to be a bureaucracy, Wikipedia is not paper.--Neverpitch 20:04, 13 November 2007 (UTC) — Neverpitch (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
- Those are not "keep" reasons. Axem Titanium 20:45, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
- Delete - per nom, no real-world significance to this fictional object. Suggest that Neverpitch be referred to whatever the appropriate venue would be for some counseling on the whole AFD process, focusing especially on the concept of offering articulate reasons for taking actions like deleting prods or opining keep. Mass-deleting prods with this sort of generic "reason" is completely inappropriate and borderline disruptive. Otto4711 20:13, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
-
- Comment - !votes which do not provide support for their reasoning in the context of this debate on this subject may be discounted at the discretion of the closing admin. That's why we make recommendations on a course of action and a rational for that action, rather than simply voting yea or nay. ZZ Claims ~ Evidence 20:19, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
- I did provide a reason, and they are much better than your irrational, illogical, and disruptive delete "reasons."--Neverpitch 00:59, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
- Two links to flexibly interpreted guidelines and ye olde catch-all "notable" is a good reason? JuJube 07:57, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
- I did provide a reason, and they are much better than your irrational, illogical, and disruptive delete "reasons."--Neverpitch 00:59, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
- Comment - !votes which do not provide support for their reasoning in the context of this debate on this subject may be discounted at the discretion of the closing admin. That's why we make recommendations on a course of action and a rational for that action, rather than simply voting yea or nay. ZZ Claims ~ Evidence 20:19, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
- Delete as non-notable fictional item, per nom. If the item is notable, I can find no sources which demonstrate this. ZZ Claims ~ Evidence 20:19, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
- Delete. No out-of universe information, no real-world notability. Pagrashtak 20:20, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
- Delete per original PROD. No real world notability. Possibly mergable into the main article for the game, though probably not necessary as Wikipedia certainly isn't a gaming guide Collectonian 20:39, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
- Delete, fails notability for fictional items. Axem Titanium 20:45, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
- Delete as insufficiently notable. -- Satori Son 22:10, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
- Delete sheesh. JJL 00:55, 14 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.
