Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Eggman Nega (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  No consensus (default keep).  Jerry  talk ¤ count/logs 03:23, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

Eggman Nega
AfDs for this article: 
 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

Alright, let's try this again. From what I'm noticing from the Eggman Nega article, all the information is nothing more than just plot info. The only sourced outer-universe info is the storyline confusion section with Taylor Miller. If it has nothing more to offer than it has now, then it has no reason to be here, plain and simple. ZeroGiga (talk) 21:08, 1 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been added to the list of video game related deletions. MrKIA11 (talk) 21:19, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Merge to Doctor Eggman. While most of the article is cruftish, he certainly should be mentioned somewhere in the Sonic series. The main Eggman article is naturally the best place for a non-cruft version. MuZemike (talk) 23:18, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Please note WP:ITSCRUFT. Best, --  Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles  Tally-ho! 05:44, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Merge to Doctor Eggman - there is no reason for this article to exsist --T-rex 00:34, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep article need sourcing, but notability seems clear from the article. (Main villain in three hugely popular games). Hobit (talk) 03:06, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep per decisive outcome in AfD just a few months ago, also per Five pillars (notability to a real-world audience, consistent with a “specialized encyclopedia” concerning verifiable fictional topics with importance in the real world) and What Wikipedia is. Best, --  Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles  Tally-ho! 03:15, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
 * How does it pertain to this article exactly? Not trying to be the devil's advocate, but I can barely remember what I had for dinner last night let alone some "decisive outcome" that happened several months ago. Please elaborate. MuZemike (talk) 05:36, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
 * An earlier AfD ended in an unambiguous keep earlier this year. As the above suggests as well, it does not seem that consensus has changed much in so short an amount of time.  Best, --  Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles  Tally-ho! 05:44, 2 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep Eggman Nega and Doctor Eggman are different characters. In the last five or so days, there's been a person nominating all of these Sonic characters. WP:RFC, anyone? Raymie Humbert (TrackerTV) (receiver, archives) 16:35, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
 * It's part of a coordinated effort: see Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Video games and User talk:TTN. Also, you should be aware of User talk:TTN and User talk:Sephiroth BCR.  Sincerely, --  Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles  Tally-ho! 19:14, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
 * No, WP:AGF. MuZemike (talk) 00:03, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
 * I have faith that they are doing what they think is best for WP. I have no doubt that the same was true for TTN on the episodes.  But it may be the case that their actions need to go to a wider audience for discussion. Hobit (talk) 00:29, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete. If you want to keep it, improve it. By the fact that it already went through an AfD and still lacks any reason for it to be an article. And to people calling him a separate character, how separate it is really? He's an "evil twin" type character who is always copying Eggman or allying with him. Basically, since everything he does is directly related to Eggman, so all events related to Eggman Nega would likely be mentioned in Dr. Eggman's article anyway. - A Link to the Past (talk) 04:37, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
 * I for one will indeed work to improve it. Best, --  Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles  Tally-ho! 04:47, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete Previous AFD insisted it was notable on subjective feeling, and no sources have been found to show that this is actually true. The article has had time to improve, but the lack of references indicates that this article cannot be improved. Requires significant coverage in reliable secondary sources that are independent of the subject. Google reveals self-published unreliable sources, or first party / non-independent sources. Does not meet the general notability guideline, and cannot. Would change my vote if there were evidence otherwise. Randomran (talk) 15:11, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Sufficient sources exist for inclusion on Wikipedia, but also look to relevant publications not simply found with a quick google search. We do not delete legitimately mergeable and redirectable articles.  Sincerely, --  Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles  Tally-ho! 17:16, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
 * See Search_engine_test. Even one million unreliable or self-published or non-independent sources does not assert notability. If you find a source that actually meets the general notability guideline, that would have an impact. But a google test doesn't change anything. Randomran (talk) 19:07, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
 * I encourage you to help in that effort. Best, --  Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles  Tally-ho! 19:13, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
 * I've given it a legitimate try. Randomran (talk) 20:58, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Where did you look? Best, --  Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles  Tally-ho! 21:05, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Unfortunately, not an exhaustive search between the four corners of planet Earth. If there's something I haven't found, feel free to find it. But don't tell us. Show us. Randomran (talk) 21:59, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
 * I'll of course keep an eye out, but it is a group effort and enough have already been presented to justify a merge or redirect at worst. Best, --  Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles  Tally-ho! 22:18, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Where were they presented? I haven't seen any. Randomran (talk) 00:53, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
 * The key is to not simply type "Eggman Nega" in a search but other key words that turn up such things as interviews with the creators that provide some out of universe commentary by the creators about the characters or to look at reviews that comment on the character. Best, --  Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles  Tally-ho! 01:00, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete: Here is the entirety of the information found in the article that is not explicitly a duplicate of information found elsewhere: "Eggman Nega is Doctor Eggman's dimensional counterpart. He has been the main villain in every game he has appeared in, and is fought as the final boss in Sonic Rush, Sonic Rivals, and Sonic Rush Adventure." Everything else in that article is simply a retelling of the plots of four games. Nifboy (talk) 20:46, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Articles that are duplicative is redirected, but not deleted. Outright deletion is reserved for extreme circumstances, i.e. when no potential redirect location exists.  Sincerely, --  Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles  Tally-ho! 21:05, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete and Redirect to Doctor Eggman previous AfD had very few votes, and consensus can change. I'm not going to be convinced that this article is worth saving, so don't bother. JuJube (talk) 02:20, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment: Article has improved since nomination. Sincerely, --  Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles  Tally-ho! 02:21, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
 * An improvement of two refs? - A Link to the Past (talk) 04:20, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
 * It's a start. -- Happy editing!  Sincerely,  Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles  Tally-ho! 18:39, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete and Redirect echoing the above, improvements, er sorry, "improvements" notwithstanding. Eusebeus (talk) 04:16, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Merge to Doctor Eggman. The information is worth disambiguating on the Doctor Eggman page for those not familiar with the subject - which is what distinguishes wikipedia from a fansite... we should assume our audience is unfamiliar with the subject.Icemotoboy (talk) 04:01, 5 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep per Le Grand Roi. Major character of indisputably notable video game series. Glass  Cobra  22:26, 8 July 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.