Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Bloody Roar characters


 * 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 merge to Bloody Roar. (non-admin closure) sst✈  13:27, 7 March 2016 (UTC)

List of Bloody Roar characters

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Article topic lacks significant coverage from reliable, independent sources. (?) None of its sources discuss characters of the series as a topic, and there doesn't appear to be anything that could help in a video game reliable sources custom Google search. A redirect or selective merge to the series article (Bloody Roar) could suffice, but there's no reason to split out in this much primary source detail without secondary source coverage as justification for the split. czar 13:23, 29 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Video games-related deletion discussions.  czar  13:23, 29 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions.  czar  13:23, 29 February 2016 (UTC)


 * Merge The first paragraphs of the sections seem to detail the characters where as the rest seems to go on about game plots and events. I noticed that most of the text is just taken from this Wiki: http://bloodyroar.wikia.com/wiki/Category:Characters. Since that Wiki exists and with the same text, I think we can with safe conscience just delete most of the text and only have brief characterizations. Lastly I think it's a somewhat of an obscure series. --Mr. Magoo (talk) 13:28, 29 February 2016 (UTC)
 * In addition for some reason the main article of the series is completely without sources: Bloody Roar. It's also bit of a stub for a series article. I think a Merge will do nicely. --Mr. Magoo (talk) 13:31, 29 February 2016 (UTC)


 * Merge into Bloody Roar as stated above. RickinBaltimore (talk) 14:22, 29 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep: Per the reception from secondary sources already in the article, and sources such as these that talk about one or more Bloody Roar characters  . Those ones I found after a quick search, and these should be enough to pass the WP:GNG. I'll try to find more later. I see no good reason to cram all the characters on the series article., how do you know that wiki didn't just take the text from that page on this wiki, rather than the other way around? Either way, the article should be fixed, not merged or deleted. Kokoro20 (talk) 17:35, 29 February 2016 (UTC)
 * The precedent, based on the Ken Rosenberg RFC, is that video game character listicle entries are alone insufficient to substantiate a full article. Serge has more on how these individual sources fare below, and it is hard to dispute that the listicle entries say next to nothing about the characters nevertheless the series. Furthermore there's nothing to show that the characters, as an entity, are somehow better known separately or in voluminous detail from the series. czar  00:05, 1 March 2016 (UTC)
 * But Ken Rosenberg is just one case (which it's outcome I still disagree with). We don't need to necessarily base everything around that decision. The idea that listicles shouldn't be used to establish notability, regardless of context, is just ridiculous and overly strict. Kokoro20 (talk) 01:09, 1 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Alas, that is the difference between an individual opinion and a substantive consensus. The three links above don't even come close to the coverage Ken Rosenberg had, but the point is that scraping together a few mentions (especially in low-quality listicles) does not constitute significant coverage for a dedicated encyclopedia article. czar  03:44, 1 March 2016 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 17:37, 29 February 2016 (UTC)


 * Merge into the over-arching series article. That one's pretty short while this list is 95% original research. I don't see why any useful content couldn't exist within Bloody Roar. If it does get too big for the series article at some point, it can always be split again, but that would probably need a lot more than five or six sources. ~ Mable ( chat ) 18:26, 29 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Merge, albeit it extremely selectively, as it seems to be overwhelmingly unsourced in-universe ramblings about the characters rather than encyclopedic entries. Sergecross73   msg me  18:31, 29 February 2016 (UTC)


 * Keep: Per points raised by Kokoro20. The series article is a bit small, but that in itself can be expanded and doesn't need its characters cluttering it up. I don't believe the solution for expanding that article is to merge the characters into it. I do believe though that the character descriptions can be trimmed down, add some development (or an overall concept and creation section), and more reception. -- JDC808  ♫  18:39, 29 February 2016 (UTC)
 * That sourcing is extremely weak though. I mean, what are you supposed to do with this source? Its a few sentences worth of "Wouldn't it be cool if this crossover game happened?" The Complex sources aren't much better. They could source a factoid here or there, but I fail to see how one would write a WP:GNG-passing, non-in-universe article around them... Sergecross73   msg me  18:52, 29 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Well, I didn't say the sourcing was strong. I didn't even look at the sources, but rather Kokoro90's willingness to find sources (as they said, those were just from a quick search). I'll leave it to the editor(s) to find more, reliable sources, and give them time to try and make this a suitable character list with my suggestions. -- JDC808  ♫  22:28, 29 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Well, what are you saying then? Are you giving an "Keep" !vote based on weak sourcing and someone giving it some effort, only to come up with really weak sources? Because that's pretty much the extent of his argument. That's...not the strongest rationale... Sergecross73   msg me  22:42, 29 February 2016 (UTC)
 * I'm saying keep and give the editor(s) time to edit the article and actually find sources beyond a "quick search". They're obviously willing to improve the article, so I say give them a shot. -- JDC808  ♫  00:19, 1 March 2016 (UTC)


 * Delete. Fails WP:GNG, article currently is WP:GAMETRIVIA. Look, Bloody Roar was never the most popular series and the latest release was in 2003. What possible sources can be found beyond what the custom Google search engine shows in the first three pages? soetermans . ↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK 14:11, 1 March 2016 (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.