Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cyborg 009 Alternative


 * 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. Jaranda wat's sup 06:17, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

Cyborg 009 Alternative

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Uncertain if this meets notability guidelines, or should be deleted or merged in main article. Listing for community input. No Vote. Exxolon 12:23, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Weak delete It sounds like non-notable fanfic. However, there's no reason to bring an article to AFD ten minutes after it was created. It's likely that the creator might improve it (or might have, were it not for the AFD), possibly enough to overcome its current inadequacies, or that it could have been deleted by prod. Propaniac 12:33, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment - I find prod to be essentially useless, as the author can remove the tag without sanction, but the article didn't fit a WP:SPEEDY criteria. Therefore I considered it appropriate to AFD it. As an AFD lasts 5 days, that's ample time to improve the article which the closing admin can take into account. Exxolon 12:38, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
 * For many articles about non-notable subjects, the author is the only person who created the article or has any urge to defend it; I find prodding useful when such an article seems to have been abandoned by its author. If there's no evidence of such abandonment, the author should be given time to improve it, in my opinion. Propaniac 13:15, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment This is the creator. I created this article now because I was running out of time. I have no time for three more days. If this article could be removed from AFD temporarily, I will improve it after I regain time for it. Meanwhile, tell me what law this article violates. I will make amendments. Shisui6:40, 13 july 2007 (UTC)
 * The subject of this article does not seem to meet Wikipedia's standard of notability (receiving significant coverage in reliable, independent sources). Propaniac 13:15, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Is that so? I checked the notability and I found nothing this article breaks. What is the reason you say so? Shisui 7:10 13 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete per lack of "significant coverage by independent sources" from WP:NOTE Corpx 20:10, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Korea-related deletions.   -- John Vandenberg 15:56, 14 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Comics and animation-related deletions.   -- John Vandenberg 15:56, 14 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete Apparent fanfic; Google search on the author's screenname "Beamknight" in Korean gives 32 non-duplicate hits, among which there are zero WP:RS. cab 00:53, 16 July 2007 (UTC)
 * That is probably because BeamKnight has not presented his work in Google at all. He doesn't work in it. If you want to find his name, go to [] or []. And it isn't exactly a fanfic because the settings are very different. One may as well call it a completely different comic. And he doesn't work as 빔나이트. He works as BeamKnight. If you search for BeamKnight instead, you'll be able to find his works. Shisui8:54, 16 july 2007 (UTC)
 * I am not trying to find his works, I am trying to find whether his works have been independently reviewed by reliable sources. Please review the content of those links. Just because this comic exists, it does not necessarily mean it deserves an encyclopedia article. And "Beamknight" in the Latin alphabet gets only 36 non-duplicate GHits. cab 00:16, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete per Corpx.--Ispy1981 00:27, 17 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete I cannot find any more way to defend the article. Therefore I agree to the deletion of it. i had thought of it appropriate because it is a popular comic regularly appearing in a magazine. I apologize for a disturbance.Shisui 51:7, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
 * And I forgot. I have not made the article for the purpose of advertisement. Please understand that if you suspected at all.Shisui 6:10 18 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.