Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Breeana (Bratz character)


 * 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 all, including the category. --Core desat 01:12, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

Breeana (Bratz character)

 * bratz characters


 * – (View AfD) (View log)
 * – (View AfD) (View log)
 * – (View AfD) (View log)
 * – (View AfD) (View log)
 * – (View AfD) (View log)
 * – (View AfD) (View log)

You've got to be kidding: an entire walled garden on random non-notable Bratz doll cruft. And not just one article, check out Category:Bratz characters, all of which are also nominated (except the repost). Fails WP:CORP. See also Articles for deletion/Ciara (Bratz character). None of these articles have any sources whatsoever. Contested prod. MER-C 04:14, 17 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Not that it matters, but I've found a few more "articles", which weren't in Category:Bratz characters. They are now also included in the nomination. These are listed below. MER-C 06:53, 18 April 2007 (UTC)






 * Comment At least two sources are mentioned on the Phoebe article: Bratz: Rock Angelz (video game) and bratz.com. No vote from me though. Garrie 04:50, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Strong Delete As per nom. This is spam at it's worst. --ConfuciusOrnis 05:05, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Strong Delete. There is no reason every single doll requires its own article. Are reliable, significant third parties discussing these dolls individually? Not as far as I can tell. -- Charlene 06:06, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Strong Delete all per WP:NOT. Whilst Bratz may be notable, these are not. They vary in their hit-count from teens to upper hundreds, many are from commercial toy sites, or are otherwise trivial mentions in articles about Bratz in general. Ohconfucius 08:47, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete. Fails WP:FICTION. -- Mikeblas 11:51, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Merge into List of Bratz characters. Like it or not, these are very popular with kids of a certain age range, outselling even Barbie.  Per WP:FICT, a list is the best way to handle these. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 13:25, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Merge - agree with Andrew Lenahan that WP:FICT is the most applicable guideline -- Whpq 16:12, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Merge into a single list. They're notable enough to warrant a page on all of them together, though not individual articles. Cheers, Lankybugger ○ Yell ○ 16:45, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete all per nom. Edison 19:14, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Strong delete all. Notable as a group, but not individually. Realkyhick 19:19, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete all If there were 2 Bratz like Ken and Barbie we could keep, but the large number makes each individual one less notable. This all despite the fact that I think WP:ILIKEIT, just because they look kind of cute. TonyTheTiger (talk/cont/bio) 21:55, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Strongest possible delete oh Lord. JuJube 23:33, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom and WP:FICT. List already exists. --Alvestrand 13:05, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Super Strong Delete per nom, is a WP:WG and totaly non-notable. ffm ✎ talk  13:32, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
 * ugh. DELETE. Cruft at its worst. Is this even referenced out of the manufacturer's website?? ~Crazytales 01:44, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete with Extreme Pejudice. And I thought many TV shows suffered from fancruft. --293.xx.xxx.xx 10:02, 21 April 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.