Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Anya (TimeSplitters)


 * 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 delete. There are arguments to merge, but they would be calling for merging to an article that was also deleted in AFD, so there is nowhere to merge to, as any merge would constitute a recreation of that article. --Core desat  01:53, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

Anya (TimeSplitters)

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Strong Delete Non notable. I also nominate all of the following articles (please excuse the large number of articles, for so many shouldn't have been created to begin with):

All of these are Wikia caliber articles and do not need to exist. ♣ Klptyzm Chat wit' me  §   Contributions ♣ 04:36, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Merge all into List of TimeSplitters characters.-- TBC Φ  talk?  04:40, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete the one article that was actually nominated. If the OP actually nominates the others, I will suggest a merge into one article. TJ Spyke 04:57, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
 * You do know that if you want to nominate all of those, you have to place the AFD tag on all of them? Otherwise they aren't included in this AFD.
 * WP:NOT specifically instructs: "A perceived procedural error made in posting anything, such as an idea or nomination, is not grounds for invalidating that post. Follow the spirit, not the letter, of any rules, policies and guidelines if you feel they conflict." Krimpet 15:35, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Just a side note: I fail to see the similarity between a) avoiding a little bit of red tape when that's needed, and b) providing adequate, quite reasonable and somewhat effortlessly added notification to the people who have these things in their watchlists. The latter just happens to be the "spirit" of . --wwwwolf (barks/growls) 09:11, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete all per nom. Not encyclopaedic or notable on their own. Anlace 04:54, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete all - Incredibly crufty. -- Chairman S. Talk  Contribs  10:37, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete all - no real-world assertion of notability as required per WP:FICT: WP:NOT an indiscriminate collection of info. We shotgunned the Gundam articles for identical reasons. Moreschi Request a recording? 16:11, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Merge all into List of TimeSplitters characters or simply TimeSplitters characters if it's to be more than just a list. Tim (Xevious) 17:02, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete all per nom.Edison 18:08, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
 * I just want to apologize for the way I've carried out this mass nomination. I'm still somewhat new to the ways some things are carried out on Wikipedia. ♣ Klptyzm  Chat wit' me  §   Contributions ♣ 19:11, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Merge all per Xevious. &mdash; RJH (talk) 19:26, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
 * To the "merge" voters: I can't understand how you want all of these characters to be merged. I can understand a few of them that are both recurring and play roles in the storyline, but do you really want all of them merged? That's ridiculous; the main reason why I'm nominating most of these is because they're non notable and I guarantee you that if all of these characters are merged into a "list of characters" article, I will eventually nominate that one, in turn, if the non notable characters cannot be removed from the list. ♣ Klptyzm  Chat wit' me  §   Contributions ♣ 19:56, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
 * How will having minor characters deteriorate the overall quality of the list? In fact, many lists are entirely devoted to minor characters, such as Minor characters in Seinfeld or List of minor characters on South Park.-- TBC Φ  talk?  08:33, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Ok, either you know nothing about the TimeSplitters series or you're a fanboy of the series, because many of these "minor character" lists list important minor characters; 90 % of these characters listed don't even appear in the storyline, and, if they do, it's only once. Like someone said, most of these articles consist of only the descriptive paragraph found in the "gallery" section of the games, which are not neutral and in-universe and, unfortunately, that's the most you're gonna get out of them. In the end, merge is too generous. Delete this crap. ♣ Klptyzm  Chat wit' me  §   Contributions ♣ 14:59, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete all, hell no to merge - there are over one hundred character models in each TimeSplitters game, each one of these has a paper-thin one paragraph storyline and absolutely no significance whatsoever. A merged list of TimeSplitters characters would be a bloated and useless monstrosity, and an incomplete one at that, considering that only a couple dozen characters are covered here. Kudos to the nominator for tracking down all this crap ˉˉanetode╦╩ 22:59, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been added to the list of CVG deletions. Koweja 01:46, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Also, to all the "merge" voters again: please see this past discussion about a "list of TimeSplitters" characters before suggesting a merge. ♣ Klptyzm  Chat wit' me  §   Contributions ♣ 16:56, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete All per nom. If one of the above merge voters would like to volunteer to merge them into a new, single article that'd be fine but I don't want to doom the closing admin to that much footwork so my opinion is a simple delete. Arkyan 17:04, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete all - per nom. I hardly think there's much you can write about a character named "Badass Cyborg".  Wickethewok 22:37, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
 * 'Delete all, nothing notable about any of these characters. --Mus Musculus 22:01, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
 * 'Merge all, simply saying NN isn't enough to delete. Dread Lord CyberSkull ✎☠ 23:19, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Perhaps you need to read my previous comments I made, specifically addressed to "merge" voters, which explains in greater detail why they don't deserve to exist. ♣ Klptyzm  Chat wit' me  §   Contributions ♣ 23:51, 15 March 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.