Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Skull Servant

This page is an archive of the proposed deletion of the article below. Further comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or on a Votes for Undeletion nomination). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was keep. There are two discounted votes (one keep, one merge). The remaining keeps and merges are almost even, and if I count Carnildo's second choice it doesn't change things. There are obviously places this can be merged to so I don't count IByte's second choice. --Tony Sidaway^Talk 09:33, 12 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Skull Servant

I can understand articles on more popular Yu-Gi-Oh! cards; this is unnecessary and unencyclopedic. KramarDanIkabu 07:27, 4 August 2005 (UTC)

• Delete. I can't personally understand articles on any Yu-Gi-Oh! card. EvilPhoenix talk 09:35, August 4, 2005 (UTC)
• Keep, article establishes notability. Kappa 12:30, 4 August 2005 (UTC)
  • "Notability"? I do not think that word means what you think it means. --Calton | Talk 14:56, August 4, 2005 (UTC)
    • Inconceivable! But delete all the same - it's a bit of card, dude. AlexTiefling 15:27, 4 August 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. It's a a freaking card. Fancruft. --Calton | Talk 14:56, August 4, 2005 (UTC)
• Merge into something on Yu-Gi-Oh; if no suitable location can be found, then delete for all I care. --IByte 15:31, 4 August 2005 (UTC)
• Merge, (though don't ask me where!) It does establish notability when it mentions its infamy for its weakness. It still doesn't deserve its own article, but with a bit of clean-up, it could certainly fit somewhere else. Sonic Mew | talk to me 18:52, August 4, 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. Cardcruft. If neccessary to prevent the result of this VfD debate from being "keep, no consensus", this vote may be interpreted as redirect or merge if doing so would produce a consensus. --Carnildo 23:26, 4 August 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. Precedent: Even Magic: The Gathering's Power Nine are all in one article, and they're some of the most famous cards in TCG history. A weak, common card such as this, then, has no business getting its own page, and its non-notability means it probably shouldn't be merged with anything. -- Grev -- Talk 03:50, August 5, 2005 (UTC)
  • But your 'precedent' supports a merge. It sounded notable enough for a mention when I read it. Sonic Mew | talk to me 14:36, August 5, 2005 (UTC)
• Merge with Legend of Blue Eyes White Dragon. This deck contains one of the more notorious cards....
• Merge. I am the original creator of this article, and my intention in creating it was to show SS's noteriety for precisely the reasons you mention - being a weak, common card, but not just that - for being the weakest of them all. SS is famous among fans of the game for being the extreme on the lower end of the spectrum, and thus has notability enough for a mention. Your points are well taken, however, and the above plan seems to be a good one. Masterdramon 18:11, August 5,2005 (HST)

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 an undeletion request). No further edits should be made to this page.