Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Characters of Dante's Inferno


 * 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   no consensus. Jayjg (talk) 02:41, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

Characters of Dante's Inferno

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

Cruft, no sources, no notability, delete or merge to Dante's Inferno (video game) Geoff B (talk) 21:38, 29 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete as original research. No notability, and I can't see any way of verifying it without playing the game. Claritas § 21:41, 29 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep, Refocus, and Expand I doubt a separate article on the characters in the game only is a very good way to do it, so Expand & refocus to include the characters as shown in both the poem and the game, focusing of course on the poem not the game, but indicating the similarities and differences between them, and the counterparts in the RW when appropriate.   The direct description of characters or plots in a work of fiction (including a game) can be sourced from the work itself,-- for the game itself I agree it may be hard to cite the equivalent of a specific page or frame, but we can use secondary sources when necessary, such as the official guide, and I think there are reviews--for the poem there is abundant secondary literature, e.g. including the extremely detailed academic commentaries of the poem. This could be done by starting over, but since we have a framework here, we might as well use it. And as for expansion,there is so much such material on the poem that there can and should be an article on many or perhaps all individual character as well, treating this as a summary.     DGG ( talk ) 14:46, 30 August 2010 (UTC)
 * There is already a list of every character in the poem and detailed information about it at List of cultural references in The Divine Comedy. No possible reason to combine something historical with a modern video game.   D r e a m Focus  15:13, 30 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Definitely, not combine with LoCCRinTDC. — HELL KNOWZ  ▎TALK 17:26, 30 August 2010 (UTC)


 * Keep If something is notable, then it can have a list article for its characters. That's what always happens with a successful series, be it a game, an anime, comic book, whatever.  Give it a character list.   D r e a m Focus  15:13, 30 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of video game related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 16:55, 30 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 16:55, 30 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 16:56, 30 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete or at least Trim. Besides the main characters, all this list does is vaguely mention every identifiable character. The #Bestiary and #Damned souls should not be listed. I'm not sure how much the minor characters appear, but if they have one-time appearances, they are no more notable than boss fights. — HELL KNOWZ  ▎TALK 17:26, 30 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep if expanded beyond video game character scope and sourced (the article is in process of being revamped this way) . — HELL KNOWZ  ▎TALK 14:29, 4 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete. The article is restored back to covering video game only. — HELL KNOWZ  ▎TALK 19:42, 4 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep and trim per NOT#PLOT. Not opposed to a merger into the videogame if LENGTH applies, since the major reason for a standalone character list would be if the characters spanned multiple articles/primary source instances. Jclemens (talk) 17:27, 30 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete - merging any characters that are actually notable to the parent article. Dante's Inferno is not yet notable enough for a "list of" article, having had only one game and an animated film.  More in-policy, there just isn't significant coverage from reliable sources for the video game versions of these characters. --Teancum (talk) 12:21, 31 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Sales figures, not number of titles in a series, make a game notable. The PS3 version alone got 240,000 sales in pre-orders! There are currently 1.29 million copies sold worldwide.   D r e a m Focus  13:04, 31 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Coverage and acclaim make games notable, not sales figures. And this AfD is not about the game, but its characters. — HELL KNOWZ  ▎TALK 14:46, 31 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Read Teancum's post which I was replying to. He claimed the game wasn't notable enough for a character list, I pointed out it sold over a million copies.  And yes, it does get ample coverage, since all high selling games released these days do get media coverage.   D r e a m Focus  18:55, 31 August 2010 (UTC)
 * VGChartz is not a reliable source per WikiProject Video games/Sources. Besides, as user:H3llkn0wz pointed out the AfD is in relation to the characters article, not the game.  I pointed out the parent article and animation article to cite that combined notability between the two still is not sufficient to cover the characters in a separate article. --Teancum (talk) 22:20, 31 August 2010 (UTC)


 * Keep per Dream Focus. As there seems to be considerable points of departure from the poem, I think we need a separate article unless we can find good sources comparing the game's characters with the original work. FeydHuxtable (talk) 16:03, 31 August 2010 (UTC)
 * This is the separate article. And it does not even have sources for game characters, let alone comparison with Divine Comedy. Characters being based on other well-known characters do not automatically make them notable. — HELL KNOWZ  ▎TALK 16:51, 31 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete Content fork mostly consisting of material which would be cut immediately (general enemies which are not 'characters' in any real sense), the remainder of which are covered more than amply in Dante's Inferno (video game). I would have supported a merge/redirect but the content is already there in the game article. If the Divine Comedy needs a character list then dandy, but this isn't it and was never intended to be it. Someoneanother 22:33, 31 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep well referenced article? How in gods name can a fan of Dante be cruft, remember cruft: Fancruft: "Thus, use of [cruft] may be regarded as pejorative, and when used in discussion about another editor's contributions, it can sometimes be regarded as uncivil." This nomination is more a reflection of the way the nominator works with other editors on wikipedia than the validity of the article itself. I know about "focus on the article not that editor" but there is also WP:SPADE which in the case by calling Dante "cruft" WP:SPADE trumps focus on the article. Okip  22:23, 1 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Response - regardless the article at best can reference the main characters, and even then there isn't significant coverage on the characters to do so, merely coverage on the game. There just isn't significant coverage on the video game versions of these characters.  Both sources listed are for the characters from the poetry, not the video game characters. The nominator also points out "no sources, no notability", on top of that you cite an essay and not Wikipedia policy.  Essays are merely opinion. If you feel the article should be kept, great, but it needs the sources to back it up, and that's where the real issue lies. --Teancum (talk) 22:42, 1 September 2010 (UTC)
 * There have been no remarks towards editors, neither has "cruft" been used derogatory. Cruft means it is obscure and specific to a certain niche. Obscure material can even become featured material. But it requires sources, which this article's material does not have. This article is not "well referenced".— HELL KNOWZ  ▎TALK 00:48, 2 September 2010 (UTC)
 * "This nomination is more a reflection of the way the nominator works with other editors" - No, it's more a reflection on the fact that you'll never find sources covering the video game versions of these characters. They're simply not notable enough for sources to examine and discuss them, unlike their counterparts from Dante's poem.  Geoff B (talk) 01:53, 2 September 2010 (UTC)


 * Keep in some capacity. Despite the maybe not intentionally false or factually inaccurate claims above, the characters of the game are indeed covered in the published strategy guide and discussed at length in numerous print previews and reviews of the game, including ones that appeared in such non-video game magazines as Entertainment Weekly.  Moreover, it is incorrect to say they are just video game characters as the game has been adapted into a film as well as a comic book series.  Now, we can debate whether the article should focus on the game or not, but we cannot deny that Characters of Dante's Inferno should not be a redlink.  At worst it would redirect somewhere (such as the character section of the poem's article), but at best, it would be rewritten to focus on the characters of the poem (many based on real historical figures who are unquestionably notable) and its various subsequent adaptations.  The poem is one of the great works of literature, something mentioned in even the concise version of Western Civilization textbooks and its influence on Western culture is enormous.  There are indeed schorlarly and academic articles (look beyond Google to J-Stor and Academic Search Complete) that focus on the characters of the poem and so per WP:BEFORE and WP:PRESERVE, we must consider these alternatives.  If the article simply had "game" in its title, then I could maybe understand, but we absolutely should use it as a basis for a larger discussion of these characters from the epic poem and their depiction in multiple diverse forms of media.  We do not have an unsalvageable situation by any means here and the question is more one of refocusing and revising than scrapping for eternity.  On a side note, another complete game of the same name was also made, but never released and is discussed with regards to characters in I believe Game Informer.  --192.150.115.150 (talk) 20:28, 2 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Can you provide these sources for video game characters that you mention? Also, this article is specifically about the video game characters, as is pointed out in its lead. It is the video game character notability that is discussed here, not comic books, nor film, nor the poem itself. Your argument highlights the notability of the poem's characters, but video game characters do not inherit this notability. — HELL KNOWZ  ▎TALK 21:19, 2 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: I have updated the article per the above suggestions. Please note that many of the new sources elaborate much, much more than the brief quotations I have used.  Even the Entertainment Weekly article is several paragraphs long from which I drew the bit about how Columbia University Professor Teodolinda Barolini, a former president of the Dante Society of America, criticized the game for its depiction of Beatrice, declaring, “Of all the things that are troubling, the sexualization and infantilization of Beatrice are the worst.  Beatrice is the human girl who is dead and is now an agent of the divine.  She is not to be saved by him, she is saving him. That’s the whole point!  Here, she has become the prototypical damsel in distress.  She’s this kind of bizarrely corrupted Barbie doll.”  See Teodolinda Barolini, “An Ivy League Professor Weighs In: Expert View,” Entertainment Weekly 1091 (February 26, 2010): 79.  Anyway, other reviews of the game include comments on the characters by actual professors: “Beatrice saves Dante…not the other way around,” says Professor Arielle Saiber, a classics professor at Bowdoin College.  Because this particular game, film, action figure, and comic series happens to be adapted from such a significant poem, bonafide scholars (see also the New York Times review from Google) do indeed take interest and discuss the poem versus the game’s depiction of these incredibly notable characters.  As such, we unequivocally have the basis for an article.  By the way, these sources were not exactly that hard to find… and I have just cited a few of MANY…  On one more note, the subject of aspects of Dante’s work and not just the works themselves are indeed worthy of encyclopedia articles.  Scholars even put together a print encyclopedia dedicated entirely to Dante, which you can examine at this link.  Surely characters worthy of coverage in a print encyclopedia written by honest to goodness professors are worthy of inclusion on amateur paperless encyclopedia?!  Indeed, whole books have been written just on the subject of Dante’s influence on subsequent aspects of popular culture (see for example Dante, cinema, and television even before the game, film, action figure, and comic series came out.  There is simply no justification for not developing the article further or even at worst merging out the now cited information from reliable print sources and from the words of actual academics and not just blogsters or game developers. --172.162.203.244 (talk) 02:43, 3 September 2010 (UTC)
 * You should really add this material to the main game article, not it's character list. is a good review, but it does not focus on characters, it shows how game was influenced from the poem. This is a great piece of info for the main game article. The unreleased game section is notable previous attempt and suitable for main game article material; it is however unrelated to characters in particular. I cannot check printed sources, but ref 4 and 6 are most likely unrelated to the video game. Similarly, neither is . You have added sources, but they do not source video game characters. This article is about the game, sourcing the characters from the poem does not verify or establish notability of video game characters. This is Characters of Dante's Inferno not Characters of The Divine Comedy. If you have motivation and time, I suggest you create the latter article, rather than expanding video game character article beyond its scope. —  HELL KNOWZ  ▎TALK 10:25, 3 September 2010 (UTC)
 * If any of the sources cited are "great...for the main game article," anyone is welcome to merge it, but the article under discussion cannot then be deleted per WP:MAD, which requires retention of edit histories. Moreover, what that shows is that we do indeed have the basis for using this content in some manner other than deletion.  Deletion is an extreme last resort measure taken only when ALL other options have been exhausted per WP:BEFORE and WP:PRESERVE.  The article is NOT about the game, no longer, at least, but rather about the poem and its MANY adaptations.  The article is titled "Characters of Dante's Inferno" and not "Characters of Dante's Inferno (game)".  An article by the former (and current title) is rightfully about the most notable Dante's Inferno, which is the poem and there is no reason to narrow-mindedly limit our scope when that poem has been adapted into at least two video games, a film, a comic book series, a toy, a top ten worthy print adaptation as well, etc.  The point being that the characters of Dante's Inferno appear in one of the great works of literature, a top ten recent adaptation, a film, as a toy, in a major video game release, in an animated film, etc. and they have indeed been discussed by professors, such as Columbia University Professor Teodolinda Barolini, a former president of the Dante Society of America, criticized the game for its depiction of Beatrice, declaring, “Of all the things that are troubling, the sexualization and infantilization of Beatrice are the worst.  Beatrice is the human girl who is dead and is now an agent of the divine.  She is not to be saved by him, she is saving him. That’s the whole point!  Here, she has become the prototypical damsel in distress.  She’s this kind of bizarrely corrupted Barbie doll.”  See Teodolinda Barolini, “An Ivy League Professor Weighs In: Expert View,” Entertainment Weekly 1091 (February 26, 2010): 79.  When professors and mainstream magazines like Entertainment Weekly are covering how the video game's depiction of the character differs from the poem, it means that the character depictions are notable by any reasonable definition of the term.  Clearly we now have cited content in the article that is useful somewhere.  --172.130.131.65 (talk) 13:43, 4 September 2010 (UTC)
 * The article became more than about the video game characters after your edits. Dante's Inferno is a video game. It was not "Dante's Inferno (video game)" because that is unnecessary disambiguation per policy - no other Dante's Inferno work has an article about its characters. The poem is called The Divine Comedy and one of its parts is Inferno. The correct name is Characters of The Divine Comedy or Characters of Inferno if you wish to limit scope to Inferno only. WP does not mention authors in titles unless it is necessary. If you want to expand the article to the characters of the whole poem, then feel free to do so. As a side-note, term "notable" refers to WP policy on WP:NOTABLE, and not to any other subjective definition. — HELL KNOWZ  ▎TALK 14:29, 4 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment. If you must keep it, title it "Characters of Dante's Inferno (video game)." Roscelese (talk) 01:19, 4 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Rename seems like the best option. Characters of The Divine Comedy?  Geoff B (talk) 14:32, 4 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Its not about the characters in the Divine Comedy, that list elsewhere. Its about the characters in the video game named Dante's Inferno. I went ahead and renamed it List of characters in Dante's Inferno (video game).   D r e a m Focus  18:48, 4 September 2010 (UTC)
 * User 172.130.131.65 is actually expanding the article beyond the scope of the video game. His concern with not creating a new article is the current article's contribution history. By the way, where is the list of Divine Comedy characters? I was unaware we had one. — HELL KNOWZ  ▎TALK 18:56, 4 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Reduced to cover the video game, as that is now all the article covers. There doesn't appear to be a list of characters in the Divine Comedy, at least according to the category. Geoff B (talk) 19:04, 4 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Indeed, I was... Could someone who knows how to do so copy and paste my version of the article to Characters of The Divine Comedy and note on the talk page whatever appropriate merge information?  I use a dynamic IP and just don't edit enough to justify getting an account.  Thank you.  --172.131.111.126 (talk) 19:37, 4 September 2010 (UTC)
 * According to Dream Focus, List of cultural references in The Divine Comedy covers the characters already? Geoff B (talk) 19:59, 4 September 2010 (UTC)
 * It list the name of every character mentioned at all, as well as information about them. Are there any characters not listed there?   D r e a m Focus  20:08, 4 September 2010 (UTC)


 * Keep per improvements made and sourcing added... with a special thanks to the nominator himself for his incredible work in putting focus to the article. While it might have been a questionable and unfocused article when he first saw the problems and brought it to AFD to get some critical attention, it has come together to finally be something worthy of an encyclopdia. Good job!  Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 21:30, 4 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Still looks like a delete/merge to me. There's hardly any sourced info, and what little there is could happily fit into the VG article. Again, the VG versions of these characters are simply not notable. There's no coverage of them. The only coverage anyone has been able to find mentions them only in comparison to the poem's characters. Geoff B (talk) 21:45, 4 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Actually, your own work, at the very minimum, has created something that might merit a redirect/merge as opposed to an outright deletion. But with the sourcing now in the article, I still applaud your efforts and will stick with a keep. You did a very decent job.  Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 00:15, 5 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Very flattering, but ultimately there are only about five sourced sentences in the entire article. The rest is unsourced, basically plot summary from the VG article. Geoff B (talk) 00:30, 5 September 2010 (UTC)
 * yes, there's a great deal more to be done; but we need to start somewhere. That an article is incomplete is not reason for deletion.   DGG ( talk ) 02:32, 5 September 2010 (UTC)
 * No, but a lack of notability is. Geoff B (talk) 02:34, 5 September 2010 (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.