Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hitomi (InuYasha)


 * 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.  MBisanz  talk 14:21, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Hitomi (InuYasha)

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

Completely unnotable minor fictional character from the manga/anime series InuYasha. To minor for inclusion in the list - one-two episode character. Her "love interest" was already agreed by consensus to be too minor to be in the list as well and was merged to Kagome Higurashi. Fails WP:N, WP:PLOT, and WP:WAF. -- Collectonian  (talk · contribs) 04:33, 27 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Anime and manga-related deletion discussions.  -- --  Collectonian  (talk · contribs) 04:36, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

Merge into List of InuYasha characters. Not notable enough for a separate article. Edward321 (talk) 05:21, 27 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Hitomi (瞳眸, Hitomi?) is one of the very minor characters in the anime series InuYasha. lol delete. Did this even need to be brought to AfD? The article's about a minor one-shot character in a TV series with roughly 4,000 episodes. - Norse Am Legend (talk) 04:43, 27 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment I'm assuming you were being sarcastic or whatever here (it's rather hard to tell), but InuYasha actually has only 167 episodes... and no, I didn't need to look that up (I know, pitiful, huh?). — Dino guy  1000  17:04, 27 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete this character appears to have an exceptionally small role in an almost 200 episode series and I do not think any reliable sources apart from the show itself will be found that cover the topic. "Hitomi (InuYasha)" is a pretty unlikely search term and even if a consensus emerges that the character should be included in the list the content is likely to be reduced to - at most - one or two descriptive sentences and will not have to derived from the current article. Guest9999 (talk) 05:29, 27 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete per the article itself: "Hitomi is one of the very minor characters". --erachima talk 06:15, 27 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete There's no need to have an article for such a minor character. Tadakuni (talk) 06:20, 27 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete Norse Am Legend put this best. JuJube (talk) 06:55, 27 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete A minor character like this does not warren an article. –Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone  13:20, 27 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Merge per everyone; does not warrant an outright deletion.--63.3.1.2 (talk) 14:47, 27 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete per everyone above - such a character doesn't warrent his own article, or even his own section on a character list. At most, the character would be mentioned only in the summary of the relevant anime episode(s)/manga volume(s), and then only if he were important enough to the episode's or volume's plot. — Dino guy  1000  17:04, 27 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Hitomi is a girl's name lol did you even click on the article - Norse Am Legend (talk) 17:15, 27 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Erm, not really. I Kind of knew she was female, but didn't really think about it, and I'm one of those who uses vernacular as opposed to what is "politically correct" - hence why I used "him" instead of "them" or similar. --Dinoguy1000 as 66.116.22.178 (talk) 18:15, 27 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fictional characters-related deletion discussions.   --  Fabrictramp  |  talk to me  17:28, 27 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Merge somewhere. As for Sota--similar treatment, with a redirect. This could indeed have been merged without bringing it here. I encourage those interested in the series to do the necessary merging and redirect on these characters themselves, rather than have it forced upon them, since they are not defensible as individual articles. DGG (talk) 23:20, 27 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment.As none of it is sourced at all, which article should be victimised by forcing this "information" to be merged into it? Verifiability applies to article content, so an unverifiable section is just as bad as an unverifiable article.


 * Delete - although I am somewhat a fan of InuYasha, she was a completely minor character that does not warrant her own article. RockManQ (talk) 00:14, 28 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete, none notable, completely unsourced, unlikely search term, so no need for redirect to anywhere.Yobmod (talk) 13:14, 30 September 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.