Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Devil May Cry Demons


 * 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. While spin-out articles may rely to a certain extent on the notability of the parent, notability is not inherited, and WP:FICT indicates that "editors should strive to establish notability by providing as much real-world content as possible for...spinout articles." Consensus in this debate has been that this article does not demonstrate that this information is of sufficient notability outside of the game to warrant separate coverage. While it is advised that editors who consider fictional topics non-notable pursue various steps to establish notability, it is not a requirement prior to AfD, particularly if the AfD nominator does not believe those concerns can be addressed. I note that a number of those arguing for deletion have also proposed transwiki of this material. It has accordingly been relocated here with its editing history intact on the discussion page. I have not userfied the material, but am quite willing to do so if the editors who propose to keep the article would like the history to help found a new article that addresses the concerns that led to deletion. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 18:11, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Just to add that, according to a note on my talk page, User:KrytenKoro has eliminated the transwikied article from Wikia as redundant to information already there. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 19:40, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

List of Devil May Cry Demons

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

This article was created on February 8, 2008, since its creation deletion or merger have been proposed on the talk pages of the Devil May Cry Task Force and Characters in Devil May Cry, however the scope of these discussions has been small, currently consisting of three supporting merger and one opposing it. Still only members of the task force have debated over the matter and a consensus of the community as a whole is certainly welcomed, my reasons for deletion are several: #1 The article is a long list mostly consisting of characters that not only are minor but have absolutely no background information available for them. #2 The article is completely written from a in-universe perspective with the chances of out of universe information appearing being extremely slim. #3 The notable characters in the list are already listed in Characters in Devil May Cry as well as their reception information. #4 The scope of the list seems to fail WP:FICT, mostly consisting of what is usually considered WP:GAMECRUFT and its content would serve better in the Devil May Cry Wikia. -  Ca ri bb e a  n ~ H. Q.  06:25, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Oppose strongly It's barely been created for a few weeks and is far from its initial conception which was largely stupid and most certainly fancruft. There are people attempting to work on it and provide all manner of information possible regarding their design and creation and importance to events in the game and the propagation of the fictional story. The characters page not only omits important characters but in some cases is incredibly basic information that by itself would not validate importance. Nero for example is a main character now and yet has a basic paragraph with no real information and the same can be said for most entries on that page. It exists however because they play a role within the games narrative. THe enemies of the DMC series play a role which in many cases fits into a particular style or theme for the narrative of the game they feature in.

This is information you cannot get anywhere else apart from in-game, anime or from manga sources or a DMC Wiki which isn't as prominent as wikipedia. Even the official site confusingly features only a few and seemingly non-prominent enemies and characters but it DOES feature them. I am under the impression that wikipedia is a place for obtaining knowledge on things and these, which with time we can improve, are not less notable than half the film articles that feature year of release, a picture and an IMDB link or even music albums and songs. We are working on it, prominently myself and KrytenKyro but we are working on it and improving it where and as much as possible.

EDIT: It also isn't any less notable than http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_resident_evil_creatures or http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monsters_of_Final_Fantasy and yet this article is the one thats being given no chance to grow or improve and being put up for deletion so readily despite any opposition. Darkwarriorblake (talk) 17:58, 4 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Strong Delete - There needs to be some assertion of notability through reliable sources for this article, meaning you have to show that there is something to work on, like you have interviews on character creation and stuff like that. Judgesurreal777 (talk)
 * Comment: Well, seeing as any character creation for the series is almost certainly going to be about demons, its kind of clear that the information is there - give us time to find it.
 * Background information is going to be easy to find, since it is quite clear in places what the character is based on (Beelzebub, for example), and good bit of the "reception" and "creation" information in the Characters article is about the demons, not anything actually discussed in the article (One of them is about the White Knight enemy - I don't think that has a character entry, does it?).
 * The Characters article, minus different sections where reception and creation is discussed, is written in the same style as this article, and the scope of this article is not to be a list of minor characters, but to be a discussion of the universe in which the games occur - there's a quite large header at the top going over this. A merger would be a good bit incongruous. The Task force and the characters page keeps on attacking this page for not being a good-quality "characters" list - but it's not supposed to be. It's a "universe"-type list. If it would please the court, it should be sufficient to cut out or merge many of the sections into larger groups - a discussion of artificial demons, with detail from Trish, Secretary, Savage Golem, etc, a discussion of the Temen-ni-gru, with detail from the gatekeepers and seven seals, etc.
 * And ahh...I don't see how it's guide/gamecruft if there's no "how to beat" going on. Not even Mr. Lister's Koromon survived intact.

22:01, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fictional characters-related deletion discussions.   —Pixelface (talk) 23:44, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Game-related-related deletion discussions.   —Pixelface (talk) 23:44, 4 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been added to the list of video game deletions. Pixelface (talk) 23:44, 4 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete. I believe this article falls under What_Wikipedia_is_not. A guide just to show each and everything of a certain topic isn't something that articles should be. To respond to the above comment: a game guide isn't just how to beat the game. It includes instruction manuals, as well as other things. I agree with the nominator's point about gamecruft. RobJ1981 (talk) 23:48, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete - per WP:FICT, WP:NOT, WP:GAMECRUFT. No applicable merge target, and list is nothing more than a gigantic list of enemies. Sephiroth BCR  ( Converse ) 01:33, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Seriously, anyone going to explain how http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Silent_Hill_monsters, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_resident_evil_creatures or http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monsters_of_Final_Fantasy get a free pass and this article is not considered as good and/or possible for editing and bettering? That Silent Hill monsters has been around for well over a year at least without being deleted and this has been given 4 weeks.Darkwarriorblake (talk) 01:57, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
 * WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS is the cliché response and true in this situation. If you have issues with the aforementioned articles, then bring them to AfD as well. Attacking other articles is a red herring - explain why this article should not be deleted and how it meets current policy. In any case, note that you can link to articles using brackets ( Article Name ). Cheers, Sephiroth BCR  ( Converse ) 02:02, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
 * ...how does this article fall under GUIDE or GAMECRUFT? At the worst, its travesty is too much plot summary, and this could be easily remedied by removing some of the less important enemy types, or combining them into over-categories, like "Artificial", "Temen-ni-gru", etc., as explained above.
 * One of the other guidelines is to let something have more than a few weeks to grow, especially if it's not a copy of an existing article - contrary to the claims of the nominator, this article is not meant to be a character page. Its meant to cover the setting of the series. Yes, it has too much detail in places, and gets listy. Big f'ing deal. How about letting us fix that, as we've said we're working on, instead of immediately putting it up for deletion?
 * If I could make only one other request - I am extremely busy this week with midterms and labs, but next week I have spring break. Could we possibly let me use Spring Break to add assertions of notability, reception, etc., and reevaluate this after its been given a chance? We didn't have any of the "problems" against this article notified until this went to deletion - all that was mentioned was that a duplicate of the characters page, and as I've explained over and over, it's not. Not even Mr. Lister's Koromon survived intact. 04:13, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
 * They apply because at its core, this article is a laundry list of the enemies found in these games. It diverges from the list of characters model appropriate under WP:FICT by being a list of enemies that are not relevant to the plot of each game in a significant fashion. Sure, a few are, but then the proper initial action is a merge into Characters in Devil May Cry; however, the grand majority of these characters are so tertiary that they don't even deserve mention in the character list. Include the few that deserve mention and then delete this list. The subject of the list itself doesn't really meet the allowance for character lists under FICT. In any case, I really, really doubt the subject of this article can show an iota of reception that would come close to Characters of Final Fantasy VIII or Characters of Kingdom Hearts. As for your assertion concerning the amount of time you've had to work on the article, it's been here for a month. If you're failing in your attempts to assert why it should be kept at this point, then that's a tell-tale sign that it really doesn't deserve an article. Sephiroth BCR  ( Converse ) 21:40, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
 * You may want to re-read the part about "spinout articles" in WP:FICT (and also at WP:SUMMARY and WP:Article series). --Pixelface (talk) 12:33, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
 * There's no need to create a spinout article of something that's entirely unnecessary. This is a list of enemies in a series of games. The utter majority of these monsters appear briefly and have zero significance to the plot. If they were important to the plot as a character in the series, it would be at Characters in Devil May Cry. Per User:Caribbean H.Q., any character that was important in terms of comprehension to the plot has been merged into the aforementioned character article, meaning that this list has no redeeming value left. As there's no need for a spinout article, especially considering that this fails WP:NOT for simply being a laundry list of the enemies in all the games, the article should be deleted. Sephiroth BCR  ( Converse ) 08:45, 8 March 2008 (UTC)
 * ....It's discussing the nature of demons in the series, a really important part to the series backdrop. As for "no plot significance" - well, I wasn't aware that Phantom, Griffon, White Rabbit, the Seven Seals of Hell, and the Hellkeepers (which have about a chapter devoted to them in the manga) had zero plot significance.
 * It is not simply a laundry list, because it is more than names, and because it is not designed to be a minor character list, like you keep implying. It can and probably will be compressed to cover the types more in groups, to easier facilitate the discussion of Demons as a whole.
 * And how can it be a spinout article if none of the entries between the two games are shared? Besides Mundus and Argosax (and the character article has a piss-poor section on Argosax, considering he drives the events of the second game), there's not a single shared demon, and even then, the focus is entirely different. These articles have separate focus, so it is not a duplicate article, and this article has several sources of real-world coverage. These are two different articles, and I'd really wish you'd get that into you heads - WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS swings both ways. Not even Mr. Lister's Koromon survived intact. 17:24, 8 March 2008 (UTC)
 * And you still haven't defined why this spinout article is necessary or appropriate. It is a spinout article, or this article wouldn't exist and all of the material would be present at Devil May Cry (series) (in a heavily condensed fashion), which it probably should. It is a laundry list, as it lists every single demon in the series, from the most minor to the most supposedly "important," and if it was important, it would be at Characters in Devil May Cry as a character, essentially meaning that there's no reason to have this article, as it consists entirely of completely trivial characters. If the demon is important, then include an entry at the character article. The term "character" effectively includes every single protagonist, enemy, etc., including the demons here. The utter majority, however, have zero plot importance beyond being the next set of enemies the player has to kill, which doesn't constitute a reason to have a laundry list on all of them. Sephiroth BCR  ( Converse ) 08:59, 9 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep the nominator gives no convincing argument for deletion. WP:FICT is a disputed guideline, and this list does not tell readers how to beat the game. There's nothing wrong with lists of characters. If the article is written in an in-universe perspective that's a cleanup issue. And the characters in the list don't have to be notable, per WP:NNC. Characters in Devil May Cry is already pretty long as it is. This is fine as a sub-article of Devil May Cry (series). The list should probably be renamed to List of Devil May Cry demons though. --Pixelface (talk) 04:28, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment you've used the argument that the notability guides don't apply before. You're wrong, they do. Percy Snoodle (talk) 09:52, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
 * I'm saying that WP:N is a guideline, not some rule to be followed blindly. The criteria for inclusion on Wikipedia is verifiability. Can these characters be verified to exist? Are they characters in a notable game? Is this list too long to be included in an existing article? The mention of WP:N on a policy page, WP:DEL, seems to turn WP:N into a policy, which it isn't. Even though the trend of voting "nn" got turned into WP:NN, there are other guidelines to apply to articles, like WP:SUMMARY and WP:Article series. Why does a long section have to establish notability if it was split off per our size guidelines? How can a concept like "notability" be objective? How can you even say any topic is notable without quoting a reliable source that uses the word "notable"? --Pixelface (talk) 20:19, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete no secondary coverage at all, just references to the games and the official website. No other assertion of notability; fails WP:N.  Further, Wikipedia is not a game guide. Percy Snoodle (talk) 09:52, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment, again - yeah, people keep saying the GUIDE thing, but wouldn't you know it? The deletion guidelines specifically say you're supposed to show how something breaks such guidelines, not just claim it. I've asked over and over how it does so, since I can't find a scrap of "here's how you beat such an enemy". PLOT, I can see. Overdetail, I can see. GUIDE and CRUFT, no, I'm not finding.
 * And as I've said before, can we please give this article some time to be fixed? It had no notice of specific complaints until this AfD, something highly irregular - no specific critiques to use for fixing itself up. Not even Mr. Lister's Koromon survived intact. 11:13, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
 * It had no complaints because the only people who saw the page were the ones who wanted to add a load of DMC information despite there being no secondary coverage of that information. When someone who was familiar with the notability guidelines spotted that, they AFD'ed it - nothing irregular there.  You're right to say that WP:GUIDE is a side issue here; but the reason the article should be deleted is that the subject of DMC demons isn't a notable one - there's no secondary coverage of it.  No amount of time is going to change that. Percy Snoodle (talk) 11:41, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
 * ....there's coverage about it already mentioned in part on the Characters page, as I've said before. And yeah, it is kind of irregular - the guidelines suggest giving an article time to grow, and using AfD as a last resort, not as a precursor to discussion. Not even Mr. Lister's Koromon survived intact. 13:34, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
 * There's no substantial independent secondary coverage on this page. If you add some, then I'll change my vote; until then, this article will fail WP:N.  Regarding using AFD as a last resort, that is where WP:GUIDE and WP:CRUFT become relevant.  Some topics may deserve time to grow; but with detailed lists of in-game topics, the burden of proof is on those who want to keep them.  Percy Snoodle (talk) 13:55, 5 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Comment There may well be a quality article waiting to happen on the subject of demons within this series, but listing every boss and minor enemy isn't the way to go about it, the other lists are good example of what not to do. None of them have risen to a good standard and all would be improved if the "must.. list.. everything" approach was replaced by some proper paragraphs and examples of real-world information. If someone could give a few examples of quality sources and examples of how the article could become something other than an in-universe list which could have been culled from a guidebook then it would be very useful. Potential is all I'd like to see, coupled with reliable secondary sources which go into enough depth to hold up the subject. Someoneanother 13:47, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment Considering the entire series is built around a devil who hunts demons and every enemy is or becomes a demon in every single story told so far in that universe, I would thought demons in Devil May Cry would be notable to the knowledge base of the universe. Again a lot of stuff isn't just plot or in universe but descriptive of the character design such as the Alto Angelos and their comparison to the Bianco Angelos with horned helmets and halo helmets.  Its a design that revolves entirely around the storyline of the game and while secondary sources may be hard to find it does not mean they do not exist and we should be given the time and opportunity to find them and improve the article.  As Kryten said, AfD is a last resort, it even says that in the guidelines for AfD.  Also, I'm not attacking the other list articles, I'm asking why they continue to exist in a state similar to this article and yet this one is considered more worthy of quick removal without chance for the growth that they are granted.  Its an observation and a criticism of the process, not the articles.Darkwarriorblake (talk) 16:46, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment I don't think anyone's saying that demons aren't notable from the perspective of a character in DMC. That's not the issue.  What's important here is whether demons in DMC are notable from a real-world perspective, and that hinges on whether there's significant secondary coverage.  People are claiming that there is and that the article should be given more time, but unless they start to add at least some it seems far more likely that such coverage doesn't exist, and that no amount of time will reveal it. No-one has even come up with a good reason why a reliable source would devote significant coverage from a real-world perspective to the demons of DMC, let alone begun to come up with that coverage. Percy Snoodle (talk) 16:54, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment I wasn't suggesting you were attacking the other articles, I meant that they're bad examples for exactly this reason - they're cited as a comparison and a reason to create more of the same, when they are in poor or relatively poor shape themselves. Both Silent Hill and Resident Evil contain enemies which have individual notability, instead of capitalising on this and moulding articles to reflect that, instead we have laundry lists which resemble bare-bones fansite pages. Final Fantasy may or may not be appropriate, but since it is the most talked about RPG series it's more likely than most other series to have these details. These are far less likely to find themselves on AFD because there's most likely something in them that could be merged/expanded etc., if contributors felt like doing so. That isn't the case here.
 * Every game series has a setting, be it Atelier Iris' alchemy-fuelled fantasy world or Disgaea's Netherworlds, information will be available on both, but that doesn't mean articles on those topics are feasible. The setting is one of several aspects of game series that can be covered within a series article (which already exists), giving contributors plenty of leg room to cover these things in more detail whilst keeping articles moving toward higher ratings. If sources exist to cover a topic in more detail, great! That hasn't been demonstrated and it's not surprising since the article wasn't created with that in mind.
 * This article started life as a laundry list of enemies and bosses within the series and it remains that way, new hat or not. What's being suggested is a different article. If contributors want to build that wall on this plot, dandy, in your own time, but I'd like to see the bricks. Nothing helpful has come from a search, yet. Someoneanother 18:18, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Please-don't-forget-to-transwiki-delete User:Krator (t c) 00:22, 6 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment - ...as explained before, it's taken a month because we were locked up in a basic organizational dispute. If you look at the history over the last two weeks or so, you can see that a lot of growth and sourcing has been done.
 * From the Character Article itself;
 * "Some of the demonic forms of Devil May Cry 4's antagonists resemble angels, these were designed to be "cool" while providing a contrast when compared to other demons in the game." - this has a ref.
 * "Yoshikawa noted that several of the boss characters presented some difficulty when creating them, but that Nero's design was one of the biggest challenges he had experienced in his career, based on the fact that the character would have to be accepted by the public and fit in the series' universe." - this also has a ref
 * "Outside of the main character the demonic enemies were reviewed as "ferocious" while the sub-bosses where "incredibly tough" and the bosses were "very tough", providing a significant amount of the game's challenges." - this also has a ref
 * "Eurogamer reviewed the design of the demons as "some of the most bizarre looking creatures you will find this side of American McGee's Alice." while the proportion of the bosses were perceived as "vast" and their battles were descrived as requiring different strategies, making a exclusion when pointing that the fights with "Nightmare" prove repetitive." - this also has a ref.
 * "The publication labeled the game's enemies as "mindless", noting that most of them including the "bosses" could be defeated using the default attacks." - this also has a ref
 * "The designs used for characters in Devil May Cry 4 were described as resembling a "legion of seraphim the likes of which gamers have never seen before, and it puts an interesting spin on what all of our preconceptions of 'good' are in a video game", the publication also said that they shared visual elements with military personel employed by real religions, by noting that "Considering the visual nature of the heavily-armored, winged, angelic warriors scattered around the various missions, it'd be easy to confuse these characters with crusaders of Christian origin."" - this also has a ref
 * See, its funny because I've talked about these from the very beginning of these AfD, and they plainly satisfy WP:N. Not only are they plainly not about the characters actually in the character article, but they are exactly what you have been asserting "does not exist".
 * Yes, there is a problem with WP:PLOT on the demons article. Yes, it sometimes ends up being regurgitation - that is because it is a new article, and the two primary editors have been extremely busy with other disputes and with their own real-world lives.
 * However, WP:N is plainly satisfied - there is ample evidence that coverage exists. GUIDE and GAMECRUFT are never rationale for deletion - they are rationale for cleanup. The primary editors have shown great willingness to perform this cleanup, if given any opportunity.
 * As far as I can determine, these are the critiques:


 * 1) "Minor characters with no background information" - its not meant to be a character list, but ample background info does exist, as shown above.
 * 2) "In-universe perspective, with null chance of real-world coverage" - again, refuted above.
 * 3) "All useful information already on characters page" - not true. The characters page covers only three demons, even though many others were major characters in the games. Furthermore, it gives two short sentences for Argosax, three for Mundus, and more for Sparda (who isn't really covered on this page anyway). Finally, the only "reception and creation info" on the character page not about Dante, Vergil, Lady, or friends, is not about any of these characters - its about the demons as a group, which also asserts independent notability for this topic - not only does that reception info not fit on the characters page, it outright establishes notability for this one.
 * 4) "Would serve better on the DMC wiki" - no, because the DMC wiki is much more in-depth info usually including strategy. This page has no strategy guides to it.
 * 5) "It's a laundry list" - fine, yes it covers each enemy indiscriminately (though without undue bias). But you know what? That is not a rationale for deletion. It's a rationale for trimming. For crying out loud, is deletion really thought to be a solution for every problem?

Finally, there is the recurring claim that goes like this:
 * "They apply because at its core, this article is a laundry list of the enemies found in these games. It diverges from the list of characters model appropriate under WP:FICT by being a list of enemies that are not relevant to the plot of each game in a significant fashion."
 * Not only is this not true in several cases (Phantom, Gatekeepers, Berial), but it's not relevant. As I've said over and over, this isn't meant to be another character article. As you can see from reading the lead, it's meant to explain the nature of demons and the demon world in the series, and to cover examples of types. Its meant to be a "Universe of" article, and I'm really getting tired of people ignoring that completely.

We've had one month. The article creator left early on, and it took a while for me and DarkWarriorblade to find the article. I've only been working on it for I think a week and a half, and a lot has been done to bring it up to code.

Notability exists. Independent usefulness exists. Background information exists. Give us a chance to continue cleaning up the article, and I believe you'll eventually see how useful it can be. Not even Mr. Lister's Koromon survived intact. 05:14, 6 March 2008 (UTC)


 * You say "notability exists", but haven't provided any independent coverage to prove it. There are zero independent references in the article.  You say "usefulness exists" and "information exists", but that's irrelevant.  If you can't establish notability by adding independent secondary coverage, then the article fails WP:N and should be deleted.  If you want more time, ask the closing admin to copy it into your user space, and in the unlikely event that DMC demons gain secondary coverage you can recreate the article. Percy Snoodle (talk) 09:48, 6 March 2008 (UTC)
 * ???? I listed spots where the Character article already has specific references that
 * Aren't relevant to the character article, and
 * Prove notability for the Demons article
 * Did you actually read my post? Have you read anything I said? There is plainly coverage for the design and reception of the demons - there are developer interviews for creation that include substantial bits on the demons, and there are ample reception info on for example, the DMC4 Boss Demons (for example, one 1Up review goes over how they're size will "wow you".) and the game's multitude of angelic lesser demons.
 * Yes, the references haven't been actually put into the article - and as I've said over and over, once I don't have three f'ing midterms to study for, I'll work on putting them in. You can't honestly expect me to just throw the refs in ad-hoc and have it look like anything but a mess. However, there is a large difference between the deletion counter "proving that notability/coverage exists" and "having this assertion adequately sourced in the article". I've proven the notability exists. This satisfies the criteria for keeping the article. What you're asking is minor fix-up - something unrelated to deletion discussion, and I can do it as soon as I get some time. Not even Mr. Lister's Koromon survived intact. 18:40, 6 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Again, until you can provide significant secondary coverage of this specific topic the article will fail WP:N, no matter how much coverage there is of other articles. If such coverage exists, but you aren't willing to ad dit now, I suggest you recreate the article once you are. Percy Snoodle (talk) 19:32, 6 March 2008 (UTC)
 * "This specific topic"?? I keep telling you, it's refs that I could find on that page that don't even belong there, and were put there because of the constant mindset that "the demons must be put on a character article".
 * But fine, here's proof of notability:
 * "We also had the idea of trying to confuse the lines between demons and angels, devils and gods."
 * "The angel type characters are really cool. They feel more like what we imagine 'seraphim' to be than we've seen in any other game before."
 * "Well I'm really happy that you like the angel characters we have created for Devil May Cry 4. I am really proud of how some of these characters turned out. I think my experience at Capcom really helped me to create some interesting things here. When creating games, there is often a request to "make something cool" and my experience has helped me to create designs that are not simply cool in their own right, but cool in the context of the game that they will be appearing in. In the case of Devil May Cry 4, the idea of a religious order brings up a lot of ideas for characters, and the pure, clean image of an angel is very interesting in the world of devil May Cry as well. I was able to really make the angels look cool when contrasted to the equally cool demons of the game. These characters are some of my favorite in the game, and I'm really pleased that you like them!"
 * "DMC4's enemies come in both big and small sizes, from Berial's immense size to the tiny monsters you fight on regular levels. Are the big bosses the most enjoyable, and which of the game's many bosses is your favorite and why?"
 * "Designing bosses is certainly a lot of fun, but at the same time it can be a difficult as designing a main character! As I mentioned earlier, the design of Devil May Cry 4 is so closely connected to the gameplay, and that is fact is most apparent when designing enemies. You have to think about how the player will approach each enemy you create. Bosses are really fun but difficult to design as a result. If I had to pick a favorite boss in the game, I think it would be Credo's Angel form. That boss really came together very nicely. I also really like Berial, he is so strong and cool."
 * "The bigger they come, the harder they fall. The game's bosses are huge. If Berial -- who is featured in the downloadable demo -- is any indication, then consider him 'medium-sized.' Yeah, we were surprised, too, but the development team has obviously taken some cues from the God of War series, increasing the scale of DMC's bosses to WHOA proportions. That makes them all the more fun to cut down to size, though. Just make sure you bring your Depends in case you're not ready for what the game has in store for you. These guys are big."
 * "The ultimate battle between Heaven and Earth. The angelic and the demonic have never been so forcefully and gracefully portrayed in any of the Devil May Cry games as they are in DMC4. Both Nero and Dante take on a legion of seraphim the likes of which gamers have never seen before, and it puts an interesting spin on what all of our preconceptions of 'good' are in a video game."
 * "Along the way you will be indulging in the wholesale slaughter of some of the most bizarre looking creatures you will find this side of American McGee's Alice. There are grim reaper phantoms with lethal scythes, fast-moving lizardmen warriors that burst out of the ground in a cloud of dust, cackling ghost witches with what look like giant shears, and life-size marionettes which drop down from their strings to attack you."
 * "These special powers become particularly useful when you take on the vast demon boss characters, which include a giant lava spider and a skeletal eagle the size of a small jet liner. The game only includes four real bosses, plus Mundus himself, and you will meet each of them three times, but luckily most of them will behave slightly differently each time you fight them, with new locations, powers and strategies to overcome. It's not all good news though. Battling the icky looking nightmare boss does get rather repetitive, and the game in general tails off a bit towards the end. Most of the monsters are introduced in the first half of the game and just become more numerous and more powerful later on, while less attention seems to have gone into the dramatic camera angles in the closing stages of the game."
 * Significant coverage obtained just by looking through the sources used on the character article.
 * .....It's not that I'm unwilling, I don't have the time to do it now without it looking like crap, and having you guys ping the article for that. You are critiquing a cleanup issue, not a deletion issue - coverage for this specific topic has been shown. I've been editing the article for about two weeks now, and am in the middle of midterms as it is.
 * Ah, I think I see the confusion here. Some mentions of demons in an article about DMC isn't substantial coverage.  What you're looking for is coverage of the demons themselves, not just coverage of DMC that contains the word "demon".  Then that coverage has to be added to this article.  Otherwise the article fails WP:N, and that's a deletion issue, not a cleanup issue. Percy Snoodle (talk) 07:44, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Please see below for my rebuttal to this - these are in no way just mentions of the word "demon", these are paragraphs specifically about the demons themselves.
 * For the umpteenth time, I remind you that we weren't given any notice that that was a problem we needed to work on immediately until the deletion started, and the Notability guideline never suggests that the article should be deleted if notability has been shown, but the refs just haven't been inserted yet.
 * Also:
 * "Before nominating a recently created article, please consider that many good articles started their Wikilife in pretty bad shape. Unless it is obviously a hopeless case, consider sharing your reservations with the article creator, mentioning your concerns on the article's discussion page, and/or adding a "cleanup" template, instead of bringing the article to AfD. If you can fix the article through normal editing, then it is not a good candidate for AfD."
 * I have repeatedly shown that the problems with the article are merely ones that will take some time - that the gamecruft can be reduced, that the plot-summary can be reduced, that reception and creation sections can easily be created. THIS IS NOT A MATTER OF IMPOSSIBILITY, IT IS A MATTER OF TIME. Not even Mr. Lister's Koromon survived intact. 15:46, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
 * This sentence "Some of the demonic forms of Devil May Cry 4's antagonists resemble angels, these were designed to be "cool" while providing a contrast when compared to other demons in the game." was directly discussing Credo's demonic form, Credo's place is in the character's list. -  Ca ri bb e a  n ~ H. Q.  05:28, 6 March 2008 (UTC)
 * "Some of the demonic forms of Devil May Cry 4's antagonists resemble angels, these were designed to be "cool" while providing a contrast when compared to other demons in the game."
 * Especially since a large number of the new enemies are more angelic, and it talks in the plural, how are you getting it to only mean Credo? And in any case, the above still display that there are plenty of real-world reception and creation info that's already been found. Not even Mr. Lister's Koromon survived intact. 08:12, 6 March 2008 (UTC)


 * They were specifically discussing the bosses there, only giving Credo as a example (the artist noted that he was pleased with the result) regardless of that there is no point in having the same reception information in both articles, and the demon's list potential to collect the ammount of out of universe information in the character's list is small, I am sure some of the established members of the task force can confirm that finding the information in the list proved difficult, the ammount there was quite small until February when I summarized a extensive interview with the producer and art director of Devil May Cry 4, if the characters wich have Dante pulling for them (including very early concept art) proved hard, just imagine how the demons will turn, the fact that Capcom uses the "lets design characters that are cool so they can contrast with Dante" mentality won't help the information search either. Some of the things that you may be considering as a source of out of universe information may indeed only hold it back, particulary adding the origin of some of the bosses' names and even direct references to the Divine Comedy are original research if no sources are provided, the Comedy's references are more hard to find than what some may think, wich led to all of them being removed after the GA and FA pushes began. -  Ca ri bb e a  n ~ H. Q.  19:34, 6 March 2008 (UTC)
 * From the article I read containing the exact quote, the most he says is that "the angelic enemies were among his favorite characters in the game."
 * He does say "Designing bosses is certainly a lot of fun, but at the same time it can be a difficult as designing a main character! As I mentioned earlier, the design of Devil May Cry 4 is so closely connected to the gameplay, and that is fact is most apparent when designing enemies. You have to think about how the player will approach each enemy you create. Bosses are really fun but difficult to design as a result. If I had to pick a favorite boss in the game, I think it would be Credo's Angel form. That boss really came together very nicely. I also really like Berial, he is so strong and cool."
 * But that is in a different part of the interview entirely.
 * I found all the above info in about fifteen minutes. Substantial, as well.
 * "Same reception info in both articles" - except for the bit about DMC4's angels (including the bosses and regular enemies) - the mass of that info shouldn't be in the character article, as I've said over and over. A lot of it (the one about Nightmare, for example), has nothing to do with anything on that page.
 * Except for Cerberus, Geryon, and Mundus' association with three, hardly anything about the demons in the series is associated with the Comedy (even Cerberus is more based on its greek mythology than Alighieri's vision, and Geryon seems to have been the victim of a name-switch with Beowulf). However, most of the creatures, like Beelzebub or Puia, have blatant design and name origins with regular mythology. If it's considered OR to link to the article on Beelzebub, and have something like "Beelzebub's name means "Lord of the Flies", and is commonly associated with flies.", then fine, we won't do it. Not even Mr. Lister's Koromon survived intact. 20:23, 6 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Why does it seem that every time we say "we can improve it, we need more than just 4 weeks, we can look for sources" the only answer given is "There are no sources, give up, we're deleting it? As Kryten said, AfD is a last resort and an article is to be given time to grow.  It shouldn't even be up for discussion as an AfD at this point.  WHoever is saying it is a guide is terribly wrong.  Admittedly I can't track every change made but I don't recall any that say how to beat an enemy.  If a weakness is listed it is likely because it is relevant to the demon as a description such as Sin's existing only through their mask which if shattered will destroy them.  There is no walkthrough/guide stuff in there or there shouldn't be and if htere is, thats the kind of thing we take out in copyediting and proof reading.  The characters page isn't suitable or near comprehensive when it doesn't acknowledge characters like Phantom and Griffon.  Again it'd require sources but Phantom ended up in DMC2 because he was a popular character and all 3 main enemies played a large role in the plot since hte main villain doesn't show up until 20 minutes near the end.  Things like the Angelos', their design is integral to the entire plot of DMC4 and the concept of the enemies thinking of themselves as Angels.  Some of it will be vapid at the moment because, as Kryten said, we have lives and don't have hour upon hour to improve every entry but we do, do our best where we can with the demons that are considerably notable and play a considerable role in the plot and therefore progression of the DMC universe.Darkwarriorblake (talk) 01:56, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Two reasons. 1. you haven't offered anything even approaching evidence that those sources exist.  2. If "more time" is what you need, then the article can be userified for you to work on until it meets WP:N.  In the meantime, it should be deleted so as not to encourage other gamecruft. Percy Snoodle (talk) 07:47, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
 * ....what.


 * "We also had the idea of trying to confuse the lines between demons and angels, devils and gods."
 * "DMC4's enemies come in both big and small sizes, from Berial's immense size to the tiny monsters you fight on regular levels. Are the big bosses the most enjoyable, and which of the game's many bosses is your favorite and why?"
 * "Designing bosses is certainly a lot of fun, but at the same time it can be a difficult as designing a main character! As I mentioned earlier, the design of Devil May Cry 4 is so closely connected to the gameplay, and that is fact is most apparent when designing enemies. You have to think about how the player will approach each enemy you create. Bosses are really fun but difficult to design as a result. If I had to pick a favorite boss in the game, I think it would be Credo's Angel form. That boss really came together very nicely. I also really like Berial, he is so strong and cool."
 * "The bigger they come, the harder they fall. The game's bosses are huge. If Berial -- who is featured in the downloadable demo -- is any indication, then consider him 'medium-sized.' Yeah, we were surprised, too, but the development team has obviously taken some cues from the God of War series, increasing the scale of DMC's bosses to WHOA proportions. That makes them all the more fun to cut down to size, though. Just make sure you bring your Depends in case you're not ready for what the game has in store for you. These guys are big."
 * "The ultimate battle between Heaven and Earth. The angelic and the demonic have never been so forcefully and gracefully portrayed in any of the Devil May Cry games as they are in DMC4. Both Nero and Dante take on a legion of seraphim the likes of which gamers have never seen before, and it puts an interesting spin on what all of our preconceptions of 'good' are in a video game."
 * "Along the way you will be indulging in the wholesale slaughter of some of the most bizarre looking creatures you will find this side of American McGee's Alice. There are grim reaper phantoms with lethal scythes, fast-moving lizardmen warriors that burst out of the ground in a cloud of dust, cackling ghost witches with what look like giant shears, and life-size marionettes which drop down from their strings to attack you."
 * How are you still claiming that these (directly copied) quotes are not specifically about the demons? THEY ARE RECEPTION AND CREATION INFORMATION. Explicitly so.
 * "2. If "more time" is what you need, then the article can be userified for you to work on until it meets WP:N. In the meantime, it should be deleted so as not to encourage other gamecruft."

Strong delete: This is a purely fancruft listing of non-notable monsters from a video game series, and as such has no place on Wikipedia. This listing could be valuable or interesting as part of a game guide or fan site, but Wikipedia is neither. The entries that are not already covered by the Characters page are mere gameplay obstacles, of no more noteworthiness than a simple block in a Mario game. --Boradis (talk) 12:23, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
 * 1) DELETION IS NOT A SOLUTION TO CLEANUP PROBLEMS
 * 2) You have yet to provide any evidence to your constant claims that this is a guide or gamecruft article. Yes, it is overly plot summary in places, and yes it is STUBBY in places. GUIDE it is not. Almost all of it is based on quotes from the game, and we've agreed to continue cleaning it up to reduce the cruftiness - if you'd take ONE LOOK at the article, you'd see that that's what we've been doing for the last week or so. Not even Mr. Lister's Koromon survived intact. 15:46, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
 * List of Mario series enemies. No blocks there but still. Darkwarriorblake (talk) 19:18, 8 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Strong Keep per Lists and [{Wikipedia:Five pillars]]. The article is a discriminate, verifiable list consistent with a specialized encyclopedia on the notable game series Devil May Cry.  Moreover the article is only a month old and has improved drasticlaly from its original draft.  Finally, the "delete" votes are overwhelmingly violations of here, here, and here.  Wikipedia does not benefit in any way from removing this article.  Sincerely, --  Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles  Tally-ho! 17:43, 8 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete and kill it with fire. This is pure game-guide material, and is utterly unencylopedic.  This type of material belongs on the Devil May Cry wiki -- not here. Nandesuka (talk) 02:22, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Actually the article is totally encyclopedic and WIkipedia is just the place for it. Best, --  Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles  Tally-ho! 03:03, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
 * What are you reading to declare it a game guide? It in no way is intended to give advice on killing enemies.  I honestly don't think half the people involved in this discussion are even reading the article or at least the edits made by the two main editors who aren't just IP addresses.Darkwarriorblake (talk) 02:29, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete It's a well-written article about a non-notable subject. Send it to Wikia if you like, but it doesn't belong in Wikipedia. --John Nagle (talk) 19:54, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
 * It is a well-written article about a notable subject that belongs on Wikipedia. Best, --  Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles  Tally-ho! 21:24, 11 March 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.