Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Characters in Mario & Luigi: Superstar Saga


 * 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. --Core desat 05:59, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

Characters in Mario &amp; Luigi: Superstar Saga

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Almost everything in here is mentioned in the plot summary in Mario & Luigi: Superstar Saga. See also Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Characters in Mario & Luigi: Partners in Time. &mdash; Malcolm (talk) 04:35, 30 July 2007 (UTC)
 * See also? PiT was redired as having no content. Anyway, keep until the Plot summary actually DOES adequately cover the characters. - A Link to the Past (talk) 05:41, 30 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete Chrachters can be sumerized in main article like in Spider-Man 3 The Placebo Effect 14:36, 30 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete Game-guide stuff, and most of the "character description" is just redundantly describing what the character does in the plot. Propaniac 14:49, 30 July 2007 (UTC)
 * 'Delete There is no possible way to write about the topic in a real world light, so the plot section can easily cover it. TTN
 * Comment What content is this article redundant to? It's easy to say that "this content is redundant to the plot", but it's not. It's more like "this content could hypothetically one day be redundant to the plot if someone bothers to flesh out the plot section and cover more than the basics." - A Link to the Past (talk) 17:13, 30 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Or maybe not every video game needs a seven-thousand word synopsis. Propaniac 17:44, 30 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Maybe every article needs more than a bare bone plot. For instance, a primary character (Popple) isn't even mentioned in the article. - A Link to the Past (talk) 17:50, 30 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Why don't you just fix the plot? We don't add crap just because something else is crap. TTN 18:11, 30 July 2007 (UTC)
 * So you admit that the content is not redundant? There's no purpose in deleting content that undeniably needs to exist in some form. - A Link to the Past (talk) 18:29, 30 July 2007 (UTC)
 * No, I'm just responding to your strange form of content management. If it needs to exist, go fix it in the main article. Keeping this around just because that is crap is just a form of WP:OTHERCRAPEXISTS. TTN 18:34, 30 July 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.