Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Name changes in One Piece

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. -Royalguard11(Talk·Desk·Review Me!) 21:32, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Name changes in One Piece

Name changes in One Piece (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) - (View log)

Contested prod with edit waring over the prod tag. Prod reason was "[Completely] [unneeded] page. Most people here are [English] readers and writers we cannot check this page is correct. Plus in the Wikipedia:WikiProject Anime and manga rules it clearly states we should be concerned with only the [English] and Japanese languages. On top of that, we do not need yet another One Piece article, we already have many in-universe pages and this one was not discussed with the rest of the community. On top of that, on the GERMAN [Wikipedia] there is significant info supplied to concern its likely readers. Also badly written and [organized] providing info of little using relevance to a reader. [Creator] of page also changed the name without consent of vote, to avoid his page being lost." Neutral --Farix (Talk) 02:39, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

• Delete Somebody tell me how a list of changes for the German translation of an anime is relevant to English Wikipedia. Unverifiable (WP:V) and no reliable sources (WP:RS). NeoChaosX (talk, walk) 02:44, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Anime and manga-related deletions. -- Farix (Talk) 02:53, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
• move/merge to/with another appropriate One piece article. Make it a subpage, if the article tzarget is already too long, ie: [[One_piece/name_changes]], and then list it in the article as any other wikilink. (removed because it was contrary to WP:SUBPAGE) Jerry lavoie 02:57, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
• Delete as fancruft. If this truly a practically informative list for the Central European audience who visit English Wikipedia, then merge to One Piece#Foreign Language Adaptations and articles like List of minor characters in One Piece, as there doesn't seem to be an article for the main characters. Pomte 02:59, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
• Merge to One Piece#Foreign Language Adaptations or any other appropriate One Piece article. --Candy-Panda 05:21, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
• Delete fancruft. I haven't looked to see who created the article, but I'd be willing to bet it's the same user who has created a lot of One Piece cruft articles recently. This needs to be curtailed. Wryspy 07:09, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
• Delete: I just want to say that we created a One Piece Wikia to avoid the creatation of pages like this on wikipedia. We realised there were too many pages on Wikipedia related to One Piece and the more we got the harder it was to explain their value. After loosing several pages to deletetion for one reason or another, the Wikia was started to house the expanded version. The same who created this page did indeed create several other One Piece related pages recently, one of which was a failed delete. The creatator (although you don't have to do this) does not discuss the matter with the rest of the community before creating this type of page.
  
  The main concern for this page is the fact it broke several rules in the Wikipedia:WikiProject Anime and manga when it was created (it was souly a German adaption thing). The creator renamed the page to open it up to other adaptions to save it however it still breaks most of the same rules it broke before. It is fancruft completely. Also the reglaur editors of the One Piece pages cannot check the info of anything that goes onto this page (their mostly English). While I normally support the saviour of the One Piece articles even when they break the rules, the workload and trouble behind this page in question just is too much for the reglaur editor to handle. Angel Emfrbl 08:57, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
• Delete. Clearly, this information is verifiable, but that doesn't mean it is encyclopedic. We don't need one of these for every popular TV series that gets translated, nor for One Piece. —Dark•Shikari^[T] 14:24, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
• Weak Merge Or not even really merge, perhaps just include a quick note in the main article for the main characters. Minor characters are irrelevant and probably fancruft --TommyOliver 18:15, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
• Merge Overall, there is an excess of minor details. One main page, one page each for the Straw Hats (and maybe a couple others), and a page for minor characters. Then any updates would be about characters on their respective pages instead of having 29 pages per saga of summaries (i.e. CP9 Saga - I looked at the sum of pages, and can not even imagine rewriting it). As for the One Piece-a-pedia, it is useful, but is also inaccessible to the average Joe. Actually, I did not even know it existed. Yes, I know it is under "external links," but how many people actually read those? The Piece-a-pedia is only a substitute for the main One Piece page if there is a redirect from the Wikipedia "One Piece" to it. --AstoVidatu 14:00, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
• Comment: Let me just say that if this page is allowed to exist after breaking so many dam rules I'll loose faith in the judgement of everyone on Wikipedia. Even if it gets merged into another article, the info is out of place on the articles we have already to do with One Piece. Everyone is forgetting something when they say "merge" - This is the ENGLISH wikipedia. We only reference Japanese because its a Japanese show... I'm sure a German reader would want to know this info... Also this is one of the most unencyclopedic of the One Piece related pages we have, partly due to its half-thought out layout. Angel Emfrbl 22:16, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

Delete unless sourced... Addhoc 20:54, 31 January 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.