Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/L reborn


 * 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. If notability is established at a later date, it can be recreated'''. - Philippe 20:02, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

L reborn

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

Contested PROD. A google search brought back 4 hits, too few for this to be at all notable. In contesting the PROD I was informed that I had got the name wrong and that I should have searched on the original name, for which I got 28 hits. Still not enough, imo. Roleplayer (talk) 12:34, 9 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep I feel this should be kept, few results on a single search engine does not mean this deserves deletion. Many things start off small and have few results on search engines, give it time and wait to see what happens is what I say. — Preceding unsigned comment added by LondonKid666 (talk • contribs) 13:23, 9 June 2008 (UTC)
 * The above comment was originally posted at Talk:L reborn and transferred here by Roleplayer (talk) 15:03, 9 June 2008 (UTC)
 * In that statement of yours there is an admission that this is not notable yet. I suggest deleting now, and if it does become notable in the future, recreate it providing those verifiable references that prove its notability. -- Roleplayer (talk) 15:27, 9 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Redirect to Death Note per the redirect text that already exists on the page. L reborn doesn't meet the criteria for its own article so this should be a redirect. Jasynnash2 (talk) 16:07, 9 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Anime and manga-related deletion discussions.   —Farix (Talk) 00:58, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete or redirect. I'm not seeing any references for this, and any time a fan favorite is brought back in a contrived manner and it has no references, I'm a little suspicious that it is even real. --Gwern (contribs) 03:00 10 June 2008 (GMT)
 * Keep it! Who knows in the future this might be a big spin-off. Besides, where else are we going to get this kind of information? Just because it doesn't "google" well doesn't mean it's worthless. I would hate to see this entry go. =( — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.235.122.250 (talk • contribs) 12:47, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
 * The above comment was originally posted at Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion/L reborn and transferred here by  role player 15:19, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Super! When that happens, feel free to recreate the article.  WHEN it happens.  68.81.95.231 (talk) 21:43, 10 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Redirect or delete per above. And keep in mind that Wikipedia is not a crystal ball, so future notability is not grounds for inclusion. — Dino guy  1000  17:24, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete. Likely WP:HOAX. The user who created the article also uploaded a "teaser" on Youtube (Link) but has been vague as to the source of the video.--Nohansen (talk) 20:31, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom, also note that the other keeps are probably done by a sock--Bit Lordy (talk) 21:05, 10 June 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.