Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Fox McCloud


 * 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 keep‎__EXPECTED_UNCONNECTED_PAGE__. WP:SNOW keep and the nomination has been withdrawn by its creator. (non-admin closure) ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 19:19, 18 December 2023 (UTC)

Fox McCloud

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

Fox is a really well known and popular character, but Fox has very little actual discussion about him. There's some sources ranking him as one of the greatest characters and some Smash sources, but nothing actually discussing Fox specifically. I did a search source and they all discuss the series more than Fox. There were a few scholar hits, but they seem more about Krystal compared to Fox than anything actually about Fox. This article feels like a borderline case where everyone knows Fox, but there's very little actual sourcing for him. It's a shame, but I feel the best AtD would be a merge to the character list, as there is some decent stuff in here sourcing wise, just not enough for an article per se. Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 00:52, 18 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Fictional elements, Science fiction and fantasy,  and Video games. Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 00:52, 18 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Keep I agree that this could be added to a list but there's a lot of material there and history. When I went looking I found some more sources and added them to the article.  Dr vulpes  (💬 • 📝) 03:33, 18 December 2023 (UTC)
 * It seems to be more dev info when I checked the edits. While not exactly bad I wouldn't say it's enough to salvage the whole thing. Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 04:24, 18 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Keep per WP:NEXIST. Got a profile in Retro Gamer magazine. Besides this, his character profile in ShackNews is pretty substantial and entirely about him, and this Kotaku article is arguably SIGCOV as well, as it's largely about Fox's dominance in Smash and potential resurgence. There are thousands of trivial mentions, but even if this was the only SIGCOV it would still seal the deal. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 04:29, 18 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Keep thanks to the good find by Zxcvbnm. I was having trouble with WP:BEFORE. A lot of these lists are WP:TRIVIALMENTION (various rankings within Smash Brothers, bare mentions about the four leading characters in otherwise popular game). But there is clearly WP:SIGCOV and I hope editors will improve the article accordingly. Shooterwalker (talk) 04:58, 18 December 2023 (UTC)


 * Keep Article long and well-sourced. One of the video game icons of Nintendo.
 * SouthParkFan2006 (talk) 10:56, 18 December 2023 (UTC)


 * Keep per above. I am surprised that this character got afd'ed. I'm more concerned about Shulk? Little Mac? and Chrom. Chrom might need to be discussed again since everyone aren't sure and just voted keep right away (including me, silly).  Greenish Pickle!   (🔔) 13:40, 18 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Keep Definitely does need a bit of digging to find meaty sources, but they are there. A possible avenue to consider too is the "Fox only" blah blah blah meme. While gameplay is something I feel lesser of importance to a character article, there may be something there given how far that meme has spread.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 18:02, 18 December 2023 (UTC)


 * Withdraw as nominator While I feel the sourcing is still weak, it seems like there's some sources I missed that let it just barely squeak past SIGCOV. Definitely will need something of an overhaul in the future but that's not within the scope of AfD. Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 18:15, 18 December 2023 (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.