Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/No. 18

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 merge to List_of_Earthlings_in_Dragon_Ball#Artificial_Human_.2318. Fabrictramp (talk) 14:43, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] No. 18

No. 18 (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) (delete) – (View log)

Despite being a main character in DBZ, it appears Ms. 18 doesn't have enough sources to assert notability to her article. She should be merged with the Earthling List, or wiped out, give or take. ZeroGiga (talk) 08:27, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

  • Merge and redirect per nomination. I leave it up to better DragonBall Z fans than I to decide where and how much. -- saberwyn 10:27, 9 May 2008 (UTC)
  • Comments: As per Wikipedia:FICT#Fictional_elements_as_part_of_a_larger_topic this actually depends on how much information is sourced and/or how much information is in the real world. A character can be non-notable and still get its own article if there is enough information. The article is to be treated as a part of the parent article. First we would have to trim away information and make sure it is encyclopedic. If there is too much encyclopedic information for the character's section to work in a list, the character may get its own section.WhisperToMe (talk) 15:09, 9 May 2008 (UTC)
  • Anyone? anyone who volunteers to help this article? I like number 18 having her own article... thanks Ehccheehcche (talk) 19:50, 9 May 2008 (UTC)
  • Merge or Delete - Either way, this doesn't have the the information to back up a claim of notability, so it doesn't require an article. TTN (talk) 15:56, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
Amen to that, brotha! ZeroGiga (talk) 20:26, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
Merge per Quasirandom. Jonny2x4 (talk) 02:45, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
  • Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fictional characters-related deletion discussions. -- Fabrictramp (talk) 13:35, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
  • Merge with List of Earthlings in Dragon Ball. In-universe notability != wiki-notability. Expansion requests from half a year ago were ignored, so merging is the next best option to deletion. – sgeureka t•c 13:52, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
  • Delete per TTN. Eusebeus (talk) 14:36, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
  • Merge - If deleted, someone will just add 18 back to the list of Earthlings. So why not just do it now? Postmodern Beatnik (talk) 14:57, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
  • Keep a main character of a notable franchise is worthy of an article. WP:FICT lacks consensus so it's hard to "fail" it. Sourcing concerns fall under Wikipedia:SOFIXIT not deletion. Sincerely, --Le Grand Roi des CitrouillesTally-ho! 16:08, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
  • Delete. Non-notable as evidenced by lack of coverage in reliable sources independent of the subject. Doubtful that such sources exist. Article is mostly plot summary. Doctorfluffy (robe and wizard hat) 20:52, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
  • Keep the criterion that a character must have independent external source to be appropriate for a spinoff article (rather than to be a major character in a major work) is disputable & disputed and does not currently have consensus. An article can be mainly plot summary when appropriate. Dr.F. uses his preferred version of the guidelines. DGG (talk) 22:39, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
  • Delete or Merge per nom. Non-notable character with little to no available secondary source material. DGG, the ideas that "an article can be mainly plot summary when appropriate", and that independent external sources are not required, are entirely in contradiction to the policies of NOR and NOT, as well as the guidelines RS and WAF. A subject's coverage in reliable secondary source material independent of Wikipedia is our primary means of establishing that subject's notability. There are no special criteria or sets of rules for so-called "spinoff articles". The same policies & guidelines about notability and sources apply to all article topics. This is precisely why we have hundreds of cruft articles about non-notable fictional characters such as every Pokemon, Dragonball Z, and My Little Pony character. There can be information about these characters in the main articles, and there can possibly even be list articles devoted to characters in different franchises, but they are certainly not notable enough to each warrant separate articles. I realize you are more of an inclusionist, but as an admin I'd expect you not to make such statements that seem to directly contradict so many of our core tenets. --IllaZilla (talk) 23:18, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
  • Delete: contains same very similar wording as to [1]; not sure which is the original. 69.140.152.55 (talk) 02:55, 15 May 2008 (UTC)
Given that the website is a messageboard debating whether this character or Samus from Metroid would win in a fight, I'm inclined to believe it copied its content from Wikipedia. --IllaZilla (talk) 05:31, 15 May 2008 (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.