Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Agumon X


 * 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 of the debate was

The result of the debate was No consensus. On a strict vote-count, I see 11 deletes and 5 non-deletes. I also see two invalid votes for merge (I call them invalid because they said "Delete all and merge". I simply counted them as "Delete all"). As such, this is right on the keep/delete borderline. I would highly recommend either merging them into one article or holding another AfD and letting everyone know that you can't delete and merge. In any case, it doesn't require an AfD to merge articles. Deathphoenix ʕ 13:48, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

No consensus, default to redirect to Digimon X-Evolution. I changed my mind after going through the first dozen of these articles and truly seeing no content beyond what's printed on those little cards. I'm applying my admin's discretion and making the "merge" votes into "redirect" because there's nothing to merge. That way, the content (what little there is) is still in the article history. I'm highly tempted to just delete the lot, but the delete consensus isn't quite high enough for that. Deathphoenix ʕ 14:02, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

Agumon X and a bunch of others
Delete. we don't need a whole other page just because "X" is on the end of the name. if anyone wants, just make a list of Digimon who are x-antibody types in the Digimon X-Evolution article. Even the 'mon that were major characters in the movie don't seem notable enough to have their own article. so far I'll only list the "x-mon" articles with no additional info on it so nothing merge-able is lost. -- Ned Scott 07:16, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

I am also nominating the following related pages for the same reason as mentioned above (please note, only "x-mon" articles that have no additional information are being considered right now. meaning, if the article has additional notes I did not include it, so those notes could be saved / merged or whatever.) -- Ned Scott 07:58, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Leomon X, WereGarurumon X, WarGrowlmon X, UlforceVeedramon X, Vademon X, Tylomon X, Thundermon X, Syakomon X, Starmon X, SkullMammothmon X, Seadramon X, Scorpiomon X, Salamon X, Rhinomon X, Pteramon X, PrinceMamemon X, Plesiomon X, Otamamon X, Okuwamon X, Nefertimon X, Monochromon X, MetalTyrannomon X, MetalSeadramon X, MetalMamemon X, MetalGreymon X, Megidramon X, MegaSeadramon X, Kuwagamon X, Kokuwamon X , IceLeomon X, HerculesKabuterimon X, Hagurumon X, Guilmon X, Growlmon X, Greymon X, Gotsumon X, Gomamon X, Goldramon X, War Greymon X, Gesomon X, Gazimon X, Gatomon X, Garurumon X, Garudamon X, Gabumon X, Ebemon X, Dobermon X, Crabmon X, Chaosdramon X, Cerberumon X, BlackWarGreymon X, Betamon X, Beelzemon X, Mantaraymon X, Mammothmon X, Mamemon X, Allomon X, Rosemon X, Togemon X, Palmon X, Lillymon X

''I removed UlforceVeedramon X and Kokuwamon X from this bundle for the sake of getting what we can deleted with less resistance. probably still should be deleted, but that will be a different discussion at this point. -- Ned Scott 11:15, 1 March 2006 (UTC)''


 * Keep. "X-Digimon" are still seperate dgimon. - plau
 * that does not earn them their own article pages. compare a number of these articles with their non x versions, and you'll see almost identical articles.  how on earth is that acceptable by any standard for wikipedia? again, note that I did not include any of the x articles with additional information in this list. -- Ned Scott 10:19, 1 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Delete all per nom. Melchoir 10:30, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete all as horrendous fancruft. Merge all additional information on these... whatever they are... into their non-X counterpart article. Sandstein 10:34, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete all per nom but Merge a bit per Sandstein. I'd suggest not merging everything, and instead possibly adding a note of their existence to the list of evolutions that are in the non-X versions of the article.  Happy to be corrected by anyone who knows something about this subject. MLA 10:37, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
 * If content is merged, an article cannot be deleted. It must be made into a redirect to the article the content was merged to in order to preserve the history. -- Kjkolb 10:50, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Yup, I didn't really mean Merge in the traditional sense I meant make a note on the non-X versions but got caught in an edit conflict and didn't explain properly the second time around. MLA 12:10, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete all per nom.   Proto    ||    type    10:49, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete all per mon, I mean per nom. If there is any relevant information it could be merged to one "X Digimon" article or whatever. Hey, mon. J I P  | Talk 12:55, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Listify and delete redirect. (since X-digimon do not already have a specific section in List of Digimon, and they'll have to be unlinked anyway.) Circeus 13:48, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete all per nom. --Ter e nce Ong 14:33, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete all. These are variations of these Digimon (even if they class as different), and if they warrant mentioning, this should be done on the base Digimon's page because there's nothing else to say about them. I strongly disagree that all Digimon/Pokemon are worthy of articles anyway. -- Mithent 16:23, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Merge/redirect all. Redirects are cheap. Punkmorten 21:55, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete or merge all. Fancruft. --F a ng Aili 22:23, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
 * I still don't understand what there is to merge. I specifically choose articles with no additional content, thus nothing to merge.  the only thing to "merge" is the fact that the digimon has an x-version, which really isn't a merge at all.  Not only that, but I don't think there were x versions for most of these digimon in the movie, making most of the articles speculation towards an x-version. -- Ned Scott 04:00, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Yeah, you're right. Delete or redirect. --F a ng Aili 16:21, 2 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Delete all. I would say merge with their standard Digimon counterparts, but what is there to merge? They're stubs. Horrible, evil stubs. Steelix 06:02, 2 March 2006 (EST)
 * Delete all We do not need both the X version and their no-X counterparts. Leroy Jenkins 07:32, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Strong Keep. It doesn't make any sense to include the X Digimon in the Digital Monster X-Evolution movie, as most of them don't even appear in the movie. Although the X Digimon articles undoubtedly need some more work to incorporate further information, the X Digimon are different Digimon from their normal counterparts, having (sometimes drastically) different appearances, different attacks, and in some cases, different types. If any action is to be taken other than revising and adding on to the articles, it should be to merge them with their non-X counterparts (with redirects). But definitely not a delete. Shining Celebi 23:07, 3 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep per Shining Celebi. Kappa 12:24, 6 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Merge, the original Digimon don't have much information themselves. Merging these would eliminate excess fancruft articles, but retain the information. Gflores Talk 18:38, 7 March 2006 (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.