Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Daikatana (sword)


 * 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. Stifle (talk) 17:34, 24 October 2008 (UTC)

Daikatana (sword)

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

This article is about the use of the term "daikatana", not about any particular kind of sword, fictional or otherwise. Besides being entirely original research, Wikipedia is not a dictionary, and though Wiktionary is, I think it would probably get deleted from there too if it was transwikied. Hence just delete. Ptcamn (talk) 02:28, 15 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Japan-related deletion discussions.   -- VG &#x260E; 02:35, 15 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Game-related deletion discussions.   -- VG &#x260E; 02:35, 15 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Weak Delete At first glance, I was considering voting "keep" because I thought it could well be a notable fictional sword or popular culture item of some sort (this FPS for one), and that the article just needed to be edited significantly to meet Wikipedia's standards for inclusion. Now that I really thoroughly studied it, it's just a definition for Japanese big sword and a few trivial facts to go along with, with no apparent room for improvement. Wikipedia is not a dictionary, so therefore I'm leaning delete. One thing I should note, while the article lacks sources, I doubt any of it is actually original research, just a bunch of likely facts that the editors who wrote forgot to provide references for. Master&amp;Expert  ( Talk ) 02:42, 15 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Weak keep. The term is used in several unrelated but popular video games (as indicated in the article). What are you claiming is the original research here? The fact that it's pseudo-Japanese? It's use in video games to mean big sword? Both of these statements seem rather uncontroversial. Also, this article isn't just a dictdef since it goes beyond the meaning of the word. VG &#x260E; 02:44, 15 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete Due to lack of sources that describes the fictional sword. Google books and google scholar hits are mostly concerned about the game. There is a passing mention in this novel though. Google hits describe the FPS game, wiki mirrors, or "daikatana" that are obtained from a game and how good they are in-game. I cannot find serious reviews. At best, this could be a Weak Redirect to Daikatana since it seems to be an important plot device.-- Lenticel ( talk ) 03:29, 15 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Merge to Daitō (long sword), to which the Daikatana hatnote should also point. It's a valid thing to point out that this term isn't used appropriately in American game usage, and also to give some information about what a "Daikatana" really is in Japanese. Jclemens (talk) 03:44, 15 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep and start a merge discussion on the talk page referring to Daito (long sword), Odachi, Nodachi, and Uchigatana. It's a sword that appears in several videogames and is apparently also a D&D item. It looks like an okay article in Category:Japanese swords. It doesn't look like a dicdef to me. --Pixelface (talk) 04:34, 15 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Rebuild as Daikatana (disambiguation) and point to the three sword types, and the game. 70.51.10.188 (talk) 09:05, 15 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep It in practice serves to give someone who has come across the term the information that is probably wanted. Its intermediate betweena disam p.and an article, but I do not see what is wrong with that. DGG (talk) 11:22, 15 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment I'm okay with a dab page but definitely this will not survive as an article.-- Lenticel ( talk ) 12:42, 15 October 2008 (UTC)


 * To paraphrase a famous line: "We can rebuild it, we have the technology." JasonDUIUC (talk) 00:11, 18 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, –Juliancolton Tropical  Cyclone  22:33, 19 October 2008 (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.