Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jackpot (Transformers)


 * 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. Pax:Vobiscum (talk) 22:41, 13 September 2010 (UTC)

Jackpot (Transformers)

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

Fictional character which fails WP:GNG - no significant coverage in reliable independent sources. Blest Withouten Match (talk) 19:04, 7 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 19:26, 7 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep or redirect to List of Autobots Mathewignash (talk) 20:25, 7 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete - Fancruft, no real-world notability to be found, fails WP:GNG. Tarc (talk) 22:09, 7 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete - based on the above find search, there appears to be a lack of significant coverage in reliable sources independent of the subject. PhilKnight (talk) 23:39, 7 September 2010 (UTC)
 * NOTE The nominator has been blocked as a sockpuppet of Claritas. Mathewignash (talk) 09:54, 8 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete Tarc has it right. There are no reliable sources that would elevate this fictional thing to independent notability. There is a transformers wiki where this sort of, uhm, content would be very welcome.Bali ultimate (talk) 14:35, 9 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete too minor for coverage in a general-interest encyclopedia. Andrew Lenahan -  St ar bli nd  16:16, 9 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete no notability, no significant coverage in reliable independent sources. This stuff should be on a transformers wikia. --Cameron Scott (talk) 18:25, 9 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Procedural keep as a sockpuppet nomination by . No prejudices against renomination after a week to give time for the other butt-load of Transformers AfDs to worth themselves through, which may give guidance on what to do with this article. —Farix (t &#124; c) 23:08, 9 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Patently ridiculous. Sound, policy-based opinions have been offered by competent editors in this and many of the other AfDs.  Trying to close these down just because of who the nominator is would be asinine WP:BUREAUCRACY at its finest. Tarc (talk) 02:01, 10 September 2010 (UTC)
 * yeah fuck that idea - there are long-term editors here, what is the point in stalling for a week, this afd is running for the normal length of time and the outcome should be held to. --Cameron Scott (talk) 07:42, 10 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment - Seriously, even if we keep due to the sockpuppet thing, I would nominate this for deletion some time later, unless someone else beat me to it, which seems likely. NotARealWord (talk) 17:01, 10 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.