Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Robot Wars contestants

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 no consensus to delete all, merge could be done but wouldn't need afd. W.marsh 21:12, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Robot Wars contestants

Despite being threatened with a previous deletion nomination last year (which failed to reach consensus), most of these articles still have longstanding {{stub}}, {{wikify}}, {{verify}}, {{sources}}, and other cleanup templates. The prospect of any of these articles being updated grows increasingly dim. More seriously, though, none of these meet Wikipedia's principal criterion for notability—namely, multiple, independent published sources; for this reason alone they should be deleted. —Psychonaut 13:08, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

  • Definitely delete individual articles as they do not meet WP:N or WP:V. Any "interesting" information could be added (i.e. main types of robots etc.) into the main Robot Wars articles. Madmedea 13:32, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Merge into one article, 20 articles is too many, and that article will probably need a cleanup tag, but i think it can be pulled off. → p00rleno (lvl 81) ←ROCKSCRS 13:33, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete all, do not merge. Merging information that fails to meet WP:N or WP:V will just result in one worthless, unencyclopaedic article instead of 20. Proto::► 13:57, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Merge We should definatley merge them. I agree with Poorleno. Daniel10 14:21, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
  • keep on the principle ground that this is the entire section that is trying to be deleted. If individual robots were up such as the very minor ones then fine delete them but surly you cannot delete article on the champions and world champions such as chaos 2, razer and panic attack.--Lucy-marie 14:28, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep as poorly thought out mass nomination. Some of these robots are champions, others are mere also-rans. Given the wildly differing levels of notability, a productive discussion is unlikely. --Nydas(Talk) 14:58, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
    • I would suggest that there is no differing level of notability - none of them are notable. Not one of these contains any proof of the notability of the subject that meets our criteria for verifiability (multiple, non-trivial independant mentions) or notability. Proto::► 16:31, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
    • It doesn't matter what a given robot accomplished or which championship titles it may hold; if the accomplishments and titles aren't documented in multiple, independent sources, then the robot doesn't meet Wikipedia's notability standards. To all appearances, these robots have no documented existence outside Robot Wars itself. —Psychonaut 17:01, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
    • Three of the robots (Razer, Hypno-Disc and Chaos 2) have had DVDs released about them. That's only a single non-trivial mention, but it's a fairly hefty one. This discussion was a fudge before, it will be a fudge again, with lots of 'Keep some, merge some, delete some' comments. It'll be a nightmare for any admin to close with anything other than 'no consensus'. Re-list them seperately.--Nydas(Talk) 18:01, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
      • Non-trivial, but also not independent. A Robot Wars DVD is still Robot Wars. We need multiple independent sources. —Psychonaut 18:38, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete all. Of less notability than (human) contestants in reality TV shows, and we don't normally keep those without outside notability. - fchd 18:56, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Merge and redirect. Even the champions aren't notable outside the context of Robot Wars. Doczilla 21:49, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Relist separately; failing that, keep per Nydas. -Toptomcat 00:57, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Merge Into an article for the show. Very cool technology, but appears to be lacking any sources, and to be original research. Edison 07:35, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep all and try harder. I don't know the first thing about Robot Wars, but a TV show such as that certainly has plenty of information about it in various publications and it shouldn't be difficult for someone who knows about the subject to fix the problems. --badlydrawnjeff talk 12:46, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep for now since at least some of them are notable, although the articles could do a much better job asserting this. Take e.g. one of the better-known and cooler ones, Hypno-Disc: apart from appearing very regularly in the TV series and having apparently a DVD, it is also part of the Robot Wars XBox / Game Boy Advance game[1], and a construction (destruction?) toy[2] [3]. There has been some media attention as well, but I don't know if the BBC can count as independent in this case [4]. Perhaps the Oxford Times is a better choice? [5]. Now, I doubt that this kind of coverage can be found for all these articles, but since at least some of them are not delete-worthy, and I'mnot going to do this kind of research for all these articles in four days, I think we best keep them all for now, and renominate individual minor robots after a Google seearch (or other means) have shown that for that individual robot, not enough sources are available. Fram 15:02, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
  • delete for the sources to count, there has to be independent media attention to each individual one of them. there is nothing here that a bunch of redirects wouldnt take care of. DGG 00:48, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep Many of them are fairly well known. The Proffesor 02:05, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep until relisted separately. I don't like the idea of giving a carte blanche for deleting all contestants. Henrik 15:24, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep This show has just begun being brodcasted in Sweden and there is definetly some interest being sparked here for the whole project. Seeing that we have a pretty healthy bot-building community here, there is a great chance that someone with enough knowledge will come across an article here and share his or hers knowledge. Since I´ve been involved with many of the robots listed in this deletion section I probably can supply some information, but that seems kind of obsolete if the article is going to be deleted.213.64.140.91 21:12, 28 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.