Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/ARCAM Corporation


 * 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 Spriggan (manga). except Spriggans which can be redirected Black Kite 00:28, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

ARCAM Corporation

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

A RS search for reliable sources turns up nothing more then brief mentions as part of a plot description of the overall fictional series. This is insufficient to pass WP:NOTE for a fictional subject. The article is just a recompiled a plot summary with a possibility of containing original research in the form of synthesis of primary sources.

I am also nominating the following related pages for the exact same reasons:

—Farix (t &#124; c) 15:16, 24 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Anime and manga-related deletion discussions.  -- —Farix (t &#124; c) 15:16, 24 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions.  -- —Farix (t &#124; c) 15:19, 24 March 2010 (UTC)


 * Should they be noted in the main page? Only probable reason is Spriggan never got much momentum besides Europe and parts of Asia. Ominae (talk) 16:30, 24 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment They are already briefly covered in the main article, so there is nothing to merge. And even that coverage may not be necessary. —Farix (t &#124; c) 16:59, 24 March 2010 (UTC)


 * Delete - Fails WP:N. – allen四names 10:10, 25 March 2010 (UTC)


 * Comment - Spriggans, at the least, strikes me as a viable search term and worth redirecting instead. —Quasirandom (talk) 14:24, 25 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Perhaps as a redirect to Spriggan as its plural form. —Farix (t &#124; c) 18:48, 25 March 2010 (UTC)
 * I agree. Ominae (talk) 22:21, 25 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Ja. —Quasirandom (talk) 14:10, 26 March 2010 (UTC)

 Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, King of &hearts;   &diams;   &clubs;  &spades; 21:16, 31 March 2010 (UTC)
 * These do not pass WP:N. Coverage in the main article is sufficient for a general reader's understanding of the work, so merge is not necessary. As discussed above, redirect Spriggans to Spriggan as a plausible search term, delete ARCAM Private Army, Trident Corporation, COSMOS (Spriggan), and List of minor Spriggan organizations. I am waffling on ARCAM Corporation, as there are hints it is tightly enough associated with the work as to be a possible search term. As such, because there is doubt, it's best to go with inclusivity and redirect (rather than delete) to Spriggan. —Quasirandom (talk) 14:10, 26 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.


 * Keep/merge Tho we are meant for a general reader, that general reader will be one with a special interest in quite a variety of things,, and anything short of the very full detail of a fansite is appropriate. The default should me to merge articles such as this, and the sort of article that should be kept and merged to , is the List of minor organizations. Trying to delete a combination article like that isa desire not justto cut back on inappropriate detail, but remove even basic idenitification information.  DGG ( talk ) 01:56, 2 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Merge with Spriggan (manga). The information could be relevant and useful within the series, but it's too limited for its own article. Howan (talk) 03:19, 3 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Merge to Spriggan (manga). Edward321 (talk) 15:03, 4 April 2010 (UTC)
 * And exactly what should be merged? Because I don't think there is anything to merge as the main article already contains the necessary information about these fictional organizations, though it should be presented inside the plot summary. —Farix (t &#124; c) 21:11, 4 April 2010 (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.