Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Power Animal (Gaoranger)
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 keep.⇒SWATJester Son of the Defender 01:50, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Power Animal (Gaoranger)
This page is entirely fancruft and has solely an in-universe context. No amount of editing can save this article Pilotbob 17:03, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
- Keep: The information within the article is splitfrom other pages, as the formatting of the list (which is sourced) and much of the other material (also sourced) would clutter up the character biographies, where the content of this article would normally be. If anything, the in-universe tone can be fixed, by referencing the content more to be part of a fictional setting. In all, this is a list of fictional secondary characters, which would qualify as notable as a whole, and not fancruft as far as I can see.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 21:15, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
- WP:NOT states that "Wikipedia articles on published works (such as fictional stories) should cover their real-world context and sourced analysis, offering detail on a work's development, impact or historical significance, not solely a detailed summary of that work's plot. This applies both to stand-alone works, and also to series." This is a detailed summary of the events in a series, with nothing else. Please explain why the policy does not apply here. Varlak 04:29, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
- I have not stated anything to that effect. I am just stating that it is a list of minor characters, of which there are several (don't quote WP:OTHERCRAPEXISTS on me, either). If its necessary, all of the plot summary can be cut down and the barebones of the article can be remerged into its parent article. Deleting something just because it has plot summary seems deleterious to the encyclopedia as a whole.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 04:38, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
- WP:NOT isn't about containing plot summary, it's about containing just plot summary. What else does this article contain other than a summary of the events of a series (i.e. the plot)? Varlak 16:58, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
- It serves as a sourced list ofvarious minor characters (as well as conceptual characters) for the particular television series that the article is related to. As most of these are mecha, they also serve to describe the combinations. This has real world info, as the second half of the article lists conceptual information, which is often mentioned in various other articles.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 21:36, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
- WP:NOT isn't about containing plot summary, it's about containing just plot summary. What else does this article contain other than a summary of the events of a series (i.e. the plot)? Varlak 16:58, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
- I have not stated anything to that effect. I am just stating that it is a list of minor characters, of which there are several (don't quote WP:OTHERCRAPEXISTS on me, either). If its necessary, all of the plot summary can be cut down and the barebones of the article can be remerged into its parent article. Deleting something just because it has plot summary seems deleterious to the encyclopedia as a whole.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 04:38, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
- WP:NOT states that "Wikipedia articles on published works (such as fictional stories) should cover their real-world context and sourced analysis, offering detail on a work's development, impact or historical significance, not solely a detailed summary of that work's plot. This applies both to stand-alone works, and also to series." This is a detailed summary of the events in a series, with nothing else. Please explain why the policy does not apply here. Varlak 04:29, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
- Delete, this is just a summarization of plot. See WP:NOT Varlak 22:04, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
- Keep: The info is needed. Fractyl 02:52, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
- Keep: per Ryulong and that it was intended to avoid too much page detail and can be trimmed if necessary to avoid over-detail of plot related info. If necessary this information can be Trans-Wiked over to the Power Rangers Universe Wikia which has it's own sentai section which could use a LOT of work. I would like to say that I wish that the nominator in a cleanup tag or left some other kind of warning on the talk page first before nominating this article for deletion.-Adv193 05:20, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
- Keep: Much of the information, particularly the second half of the article, are taken directly from japanese source (which are referenced and available for view), and can't be found elsewhere in english. Angel the Techrat 15:56, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
- Strong Keep as per all of the above. I also agree with WP:NOT#IINFO. Greg Jones II 19:58, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
- Comment Strong keep? Even keeps? Has anyone read this article? There is significiant unsourced information that (even with sources) would be garbage information. I will take a quote from the beginning of this article to demonstrate the drivel contained within: "All of the Gaoranger mecha use the command "Hundred Beast Fusion" (百獣合体, Hyakujū Gattai?) to combine, with the exception of GaoHunter Evil, which used "Demon Beast Fusion" (魔獣合体, Majū Gattai?) instead. When an additional Power Animal is being added to a combination, the command "Hundred Beast Armament" (百獣武装, Hyakujū Busō?) is used".
There may be a lot of information in this article, but it is complete and utter garbage. There are few worse articles on Wikipedia. Transwiki this to Power Rangers land and throw it in the dumpster where it belongs. Again, there is no notability here, it is entirely fancruft and plot information, and cannot be cited from reliable sources. Pilotbob 04:29, 25 October 2007 (UTC)- The only reasons you think it should be deleted because you think its not salvagable. The only issue here is that you have no idea what the article is about or what its related to. The quote you cite makes perfect sense to people who know about it, and it is certainly not "garbage" or not citable to reliable sources. And I seriously think you need to watch your tone.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 04:53, 25 October 2007 (UTC)
- I also agree with what Ryulong said and If you saw the comment I made in my vote that you should used a cleanup or In-universe tag as a warning symbol before you nominated this for deletion. Two things you should know Pilotbob is a. I started putting in first episode appearances in the mecha formation summaries to state which episode it first appeared in to help make it understandable. and b. Back during the construction of the summaries long ago prior to me adding my own account name, I came up with and wrote this: Although there are numerous Power Animal combinations, what is listed here in this section are the combinations that appeared in the show, the movie, and a few other sources.. The reason why I did that was to keep the details within the parameters of the show and the official source books to avoid having it getting overflowed with two much information. Although GrnRngr.coms' list of possible combinations is a good source for explaining all the possible combinations, I wanted to avoid overdetailing as much as possible. -Adv193 05:27, 25 October 2007 (UTC)
- The only reasons you think it should be deleted because you think its not salvagable. The only issue here is that you have no idea what the article is about or what its related to. The quote you cite makes perfect sense to people who know about it, and it is certainly not "garbage" or not citable to reliable sources. And I seriously think you need to watch your tone.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 04:53, 25 October 2007 (UTC)
- KEEP Has source cited, so no solid reason for delete. In-universe context issue can be fix. L-Zwei 05:27, 25 October 2007 (UTC)
- Delete as a list of non-notable neogolisms.Without nofootnotes for primary sources, and no reliable sources to demonstrate notability, this game guide to Goa characters is just not enyclopedic by a long shot. --Gavin Collins 14:07, 28 October 2007 (UTC)
- This is not a list of neologisms nor is it a game guide (it is a list of characters from a television show that uses terms that are found within the television show) and there are reliable sources that demonstrate the notability (there is the official website in Japanese and two separate English language sites that state the information in English). That shows that all of your deletion reasons are null and void.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 22:10, 28 October 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.
