Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lapras


 * 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 speedy keep. Nomination withdrawn. Turns out Lapras is baby. (non-admin closure) Bryn (talk) (contributions) 05:48, 12 July 2021 (UTC)

Lapras

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Lacks notability, and a lot of the Reception content is padded to give the impression of notability. Also lacks background info on its creation. Bryn (talk) (contributions) 00:43, 10 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 00:49, 10 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Video games-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 00:49, 10 July 2021 (UTC)


 * Redirect to List of generation I Pokémon: Same argument as the other Pokemon AfDs from this batch, non-notable and lacks reliable independent sources. Redirect preferred instead of outright deletion. Curbon7 (talk) 03:22, 10 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Redirect as per Curbon7, and protect from recreation. Not enough in-depth coverage to pass WP:GNG.  Onel 5969  TT me 12:52, 10 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Redirect to List of generation I Pokémon, the article is scraping the bottom of the barrel to justify its existence, fails WP:GNG.ZXCVBNM (TALK) 17:33, 10 July 2021 (UTC)
 * WEAK Keep Per WP:NEXIST per sources cited by Haleth. I think that due to its usage as a mascot in Japan, it would pass WP:GNG, if only barely.--ZXCVBNM (TALK) 12:38, 11 July 2021 (UTC)
 * There's also the unfortunate 2017 death by Lapras incident in Singapore, which has been covered by multiple news media outlets internationally besides the one I linked. Haleth (talk) 19:45, 11 July 2021 (UTC)


 * Redirect to List of generation IV Pokémon, fails WP:NFICTION and WP:GNG. Link20XX (talk) 18:19, 10 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep per WP:NEXIST. I don't believe most of the participants in this discussion have actually done a proper WP:BEFORE. The call for a page protection without presenting a proper argument or rationale to support it in particular is clearly a bad faith call. The subject was subject to sustained, significant coverage about this by multiple diverse sources which are not specialized video game media which started before the current COVID pandemic and continued into 2020. In summary, it has been involved with the Miyagi Prefecture administration's tourism promotional efforts since 2016 and became one of its official mascots or "tourism ambassadors" by mid-2019: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 6, 7. That is besides general coverage of the character's notoriety like this: 8. When analyzed in conjunction with the existing cited sources, it unambiguously meets the WP:GNG threshold to me. Since AfD is not a vote is a position advocated by many regular AfD participants, any redirect statements in this discussion which do not properly analyze the cited sources or the extent of available sourcing not used in this article should be discarded by the closer. Haleth (talk) 01:35, 11 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Being the mascot of a prefecture is pretty cool, but like, it feels as though this is the only thing going for it. I've no prejudice against more content being added in a recreated article if it is found. - 64.235.79.240 (talk) 02:34, 11 July 2021 (UTC)
 * God damn it mobile, why am I signed out. This is Bryn. - 64.235.79.240 (talk) 02:35, 11 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Quite frankly, the only thing going for it is the only thing that justifies the article's existence on Wikipedia per WP:GNG, as there is sustained non-trivial coverage about the character's association with Miyagi Prefecture by multiple reliable sources independent from the local prefecture government and the Pokemon Company, dating back to 2016. The current consensus on Wikipedia appears to favour coverage from a real-world perspective, and the subject has something the vast majority of Pokemon species do not have beyond in-depth coverage of their in-universe or in-game roles which is essentially most of the coverage relating to Pokemon species we can find. Haleth (talk) 03:20, 11 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Eh, fuck it. It's not like I want to delete the article.
 * Keep - Already placed the sources that were mentioned above, the article might barely passes notability. 180.194.138.13 (talk) 23:41, 11 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep per Haleth's excellent source analysis. Satisfies WP:GNG. Mlb96 (talk) 03:43, 12 July 2021 (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.