Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Battling companion

From Cleanup: Battling companion - needs some cleanup, plus unsure if anyone recognized this genre other than the author. (imported from Cleanup by SimonP)
 * Reluctant Delete on grounds of original research. Very useful concept, if it can be used in other articles then go for it. The Land 19:51, 30 May 2004 (UTC)


 * delete. original research. -- Tlotoxl 18:19, 30 May 2004 (UTC)
 * I've been wondering what to do about this one. It's a legitimate phenomenon (more or less), but the name isn't.  Neutral for now.  R ADICAL B ENDER  &#9733;  21:32, 31 May 2004 (UTC)
 * It's not often Wiki gets hoist by its own petard, but this'd be one time. Yes, it's original research, but yes, it's worth keeping. I vote a one-time-only exception to the no original research rule. Denni 20:49, 2 Jun 2004 (UTC)
 * No way, dude -- no exceptions to the rule. If we let this one through, Shawn Mikula, John Gelles, Thomas Gangale, et al, are going to come back in force to request their own exceptions. No freaking way. Original research: delete. Wile E. Heresiarch 21:40, 3 Jun 2004 (UTC)
 * Ick. The article is pretty good.  If there was a name for the genre, I'd say keep, but as it stands it seems like we're making up our own category (even if it's a reasonable and valid one.)  Delete. Isomorphic 14:45, 4 Jun 2004 (UTC)