Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Frieza family tree


 * 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 of the debate was delete. Flowerparty ■ 00:07, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

Frieza family tree
Reason why the page should be deleted Orion Minor 05:37, 1 April 2006 (UTC)

Delete Nomination There's nothing here of any kind of substance. The info that is in here is either on another page or completely false.
 * Delete, Frieza related to Vegeta? Obviously nonsense -- T B C [[Image:Confused-tpvgames.gif|18px|]] ???  ???   ??? 05:43, 1 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete the useless fancruft. — Cuivi é  nen , Saturday, 1 April 2006 @ 18:22 (UTC)


 * Do NOT DELETE, NO! please notify me of any problems or inconsistencies. First off, the family tree is related to WORK, not genetics. The family tree is based on rank, as stated in the summary. Before saying stuff like that, read the bit first. of course vegeta isn't blood related. that's not what the tree is about. I'm against the deletion also because I spent hours making the pages. Let's fix the stuff you find wrong, but deletion is a bad idea. - Zarbon
 * If a family tree isn't based on genetic relationships, then it isn't called a "family" tree -- T B C [[Image:Confused-tpvgames.gif|18px|]] ???  ???   ??? 23:22, 1 April 2006 (UTC)
 * don't delete, hmm...i for one like the page. i don't think it's false info. i mean, the creator of the page has written in the beginning that its relation is for the work force and not based on a blood relaion, so you guys misunderstood him there. I think the page should stay. - 71.246.104.214
 * Comment - user's only contributions are to this AfD. - Rynne 22:20, 1 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:NOR. Looking through Talk:Frieza family tree, it seems like  constructed this chart himself; it's certainly not sourced elsewhere.  There are also WP:OWN issues: the creator's first comment on the talk page is, "This is getting very annoying. People keep coming in and ruining my original conception."  See also: Red Ribbon Army family tree, Android family Tree, Majin family tree - Rynne 21:54, 1 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Those have all been nominated for deletion at Articles for deletion/Red Ribbon Army family tree. -- Saberwyn 22:49, 1 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. Fishhead64 21:57, 1 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete WP:NOT an indiscriminate collection of information. I'm not sure how this is of interest to anyone that has not watched the series and if you have watched it... what do you need this chart for?  Kotepho 23:28, 1 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete - WP:NOT. --Khoikhoi 03:11, 2 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete as fancruft, OR, and because WP:NOT an indiscriminate collection of information. MCB 07:17, 2 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per reasons given above, setting aside my thought that 71.246.104.214 might be an anonymous Zarbon sock-puppet. Voice of Treason 07:45, 2 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:NOT. MaxSem 12:00, 2 April 2006 (UTC)

For all intensive purposes, you ppl are neglecting the work i put into it. it took me days, literally, to get all the stuff together. you do realize that there is truth behind it and its not fan-whatever you want to call it. you can easily fix the stuff you find inconsistent without deleting it. that's why discussion pages are made in the first place. but to say that something's fanmade is just plain negligent ignorance from all your part. - Zarbon
 * Zarbon -- please see WP:OWN and WP:NPA. Also see your own talk page and the dozens of criticisms and warnings you've received for violating various Wikipedia policies.  You seem to have contributed some good edits in between the numerous edit wars and other conflicts, but if you continue like this you're eventually either going to get frustrated and quit or wind up banned.  It's never good to lose someone who has the potential to be a constructive editor. 4.89.246.208 18:30, 2 April 2006 (UTC)

yes, what you are saying is recognizable. But what can i do to prevent the deletion of something i spent so long to construct? - Zarbon
 * Delete - fancruft. Kafziel 12:52, 3 April 2006 (UTC)


 * neutral/don't delete, personally...i find some of the stuff accurate. the description is well done. based on some stuff though...(paragus)...there are inconsistencies. but overall, the page shouldn't be deleted. maybe you guys can have him fix the stuff or something. i don't think deleting the page will solve the problem though. - 149.68.168.184
 * Comment - user appears to be a sockpuppet of Zarbon, see 149.68.168.184's edit here (all 149.68.168.184 contributions). - Rynne 14:52, 3 April 2006 (UTC)


 * I am seriously getting tired of being accused of sock puppetry. this is lame. just because others have similar ip's and post near the same time as me, does not make them sock puppets. Also, I'm leaving this decision on you ppl, because you seemingly aren't paying any attention to the work itself and are pretty much "ganging up" on me. Half the people here I already know or have crossed paths with before and they are obviously looking for a chance to screw me over since they've had it out for me ever since the start. - Zarbon
 * Comment: The reason you're being suspected of sock puppetry is because these anonymous IP addresses are posting to Talk pages as Zarbon. Note that the above "don't delete" vote and my note of sockpuppetry was deleted by 149.68.172.71, who also appears to be a sockpuppet of Zarbon. - Rynne 16:00, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

Whatever the case may be...the discussion is about my page. Please...for all those against me, please rethink it. I spent a very long time compiling all that which is needed to build this page. It is my essence, but it is also mostly factual. - Zarbon
 * It isn't your page; it's Wikipedia's page, and this is the procedure to decide if the pages stay or go. If you think it doesn't meet the stated criteria for deletion, then argue the specific points in question.  Up until the time the pages are deleted, you can freely save a copy of the pages so that you can post them later to other websites if you want to.  There are probably some anime Wikis out there that would welcome them.  You might even be able to incorporate your power structure charts into existing DBZ articles here on Wikipedia, but having four articles just to showcase four charts you drew probably isn't ever going to gain acceptance.4.89.242.145 19:54, 3 April 2006 (UTC)


 * Delete, NN FC. —   pd_THOR  undefined | 16:31, 3 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete, Wikipedia is not WikiTree. Stifle 23:02, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

wikitree? I didn't even know that existed. - Zarbon


 * Delete - The tree is completely absurd and should be removed. If it isn't based on genetics, why call it a family tree?? Call it a corporate ladder or whatever, but under the current name, it only misleads those reading it! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.129.195.149 (talk • contribs)


 * 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.