Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dirt Rocket


 * 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. -- Cirt (talk) 02:15, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

Dirt Rocket

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

Delete - character is really obscure NotARealWord (talk) 14:08, 29 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete, the only source doesn't look reliable. Also does not indicate encyclopedic notability. -- Jeandré, 2010-08-29t14:13z
 * Keep It's a stub under construction. This isn't a race to get articles finished. Mathewignash (talk) 14:18, 29 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete - Doesn't reliable sources to establish WP:N. Derild  49  21  ☼  14:26, 29 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete Has no sources to indicate this is notavble.Slatersteven (talk) 14:41, 29 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment If deleted please redirect back to the article on Mini-Cons in general. Mathewignash (talk) 17:55, 29 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 18:33, 29 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete unless evidence of real notability is forthcoming. J Milburn (talk) 19:18, 29 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Redirect to Mini-Cons, which should have a complete list of them.  D r e a m Focus  21:32, 29 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete or redirect to the appropriate character list (List of Mini-Cons). Too minor to have receieved the requisite extent of coverage in reliable sources. Andrew Lenahan -  St ar bli nd  02:16, 30 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: The article under discussion here has been flagged for rescue by the Article Rescue Squadron, with no explanation as to why this article should be rescued and how that could happen (per ARS instructions).    Snotty Wong   babble 15:47, 30 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete or redirect per the suggestions above. Clearly not notable.    Snotty Wong   babble 15:47, 30 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Centralize discussion and merge and redirect as accordingly decided by Articles for deletion/Transformers centralized discussion. There are so many articles, surely some of them can be lumped. — Code  Hydro  13:40, 31 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete - per WP:GNG- no significant independent coverage. Claritas § 16:21, 31 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment - I don't think there's any need for a redirect, considering how obscure and easily ignored a character this is. NotARealWord (talk) 12:18, 1 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Merge and redirect to Transformers Classics pursuant to the guidelines for elements within a notable fictional work listed at Notability (fiction). This is a recurring character that has at least two toys modelled after him. No need to destroy the article or its history as the character may become more significant with future Transformer projects. Inniverse (talk) 14:12, 1 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment -Um, Inniverse, according to TFWiki, this character has only appeared in one online text story, and had only one toy. I don't see how one story and one toy would count as "recurring". NotARealWord (talk) 07:57, 2 September 2010 (UTC)


 * Merge The actual choice is between merge and keep; it seems to me there is not enough information about this particular character for a separate article.    DGG ( talk ) 02:51, 2 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete due to lack of sources to WP:verify notability of this topic as a character or as a consumer toy. Shooterwalker (talk) 21:38, 2 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Redirect to Transformers Classics or Mini-Con. The vast majority of deletes here I see are because it is not notable, and/or that it lacks reliable sources. That may be but since it is a character it is still a possible search term, I really dont see this as having it's own article that part is clear per consensus here. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 21:44, 4 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Is a redirect really necessary for such a character? NotARealWord (talk) 00:26, 5 September 2010 (UTC)


 * Delete Its been shown time and time again the so called "sources" on this and many other Transformers articles are unreliable :See "Reliable sources for Transformers" Dwanyewest (talk) 01:49, 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.