Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Devastator (Transformers) (2nd nomination)


 * 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 redirect to List of Decepticons. The content is all there in the page history to allow for selective merging as desired. –  Juliancolton  &#124; Talk 03:16, 31 January 2017 (UTC)

Devastator (Transformers)
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Majority of the cites to WP:RS are either not to these characters or only passing mentions. Most of the article is unsourced in-universe plot and character recap. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 05:05, 7 January 2017 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Keep or merge to List of Decepticons. BOZ (talk) 12:39, 11 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep & allow others to provide more sources. GoodDay (talk) 03:38, 13 January 2017 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 06:58, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. North America1000 07:00, 14 January 2017 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Delete for want of reliable sourcing. Excessive fancruft, and none of this stuff is worth merging anywhere. It is no use to assert others will eventually provide reliable sources. Reyk  YO!  12:14, 17 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep DrachenFyre (talk) 14:12, 17 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Comment: Maybe all the people keen to keep this article could make it less terrible? Or is that too much to ask? Josh Milburn (talk) 23:08, 18 January 2017 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, –  Juliancolton  &#124; Talk 02:19, 23 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Merge and redirect to List of Decepticons. I agree with the nominator's characterization of this article as mostly unsourced in-universe fancruft.  The little bit here that can be usefully merged would fit well in the proposed target.  NewYorkActuary (talk) 18:37, 23 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Redirect to the aforementioned list. I think there's enough material out there to source a decent article on Devastator, but the current article is awful and it will be easier to start from scratch. Argento Surfer (talk) 13:44, 24 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science fiction-related deletion discussions. Necrothesp (talk) 14:57, 24 January 2017 (UTC)


 * Merge and redirect as above. Maybe a not-terrible article is too much to ask... Josh Milburn (talk) 23:11, 28 January 2017 (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.