Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Doraemon media


 * 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 redirect to Doraemon. There is general consensus that this should not exist as a stand-alone article. There was an objection to redirecting on the grounds that the article title is not a likely search term. However, the argument was also made that this is a long-standing article that people may search for and that it should be preserved for attribution purposes. There was also greater support for a redirect than delete in general, so I'm closing as a redirect due to consensus and the strength of the arguments advanced. (non-admin closure) Spirit of Eagle (talk) 05:34, 21 January 2016 (UTC)

List of Doraemon media

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Prodded as redundant to nav box. The prod expired and was deleted only to be listed at Requests for undeletion and subsequently restored.

The article is a hangover from older formats used by the Anime and manga project and seperate lists of all media as navigation or information are no longer used. Instead the media is handled in the body of the parent article with individual spin off articles where required - the aim being content articles rather than lots of list articles which then link to other pages. Additionally this form of link listing IS unnecessary when we have a template navbox on all related articles. This is an established method and many older articles have been "converted" in this fashion.

I believe the undeletion was performed in good faith but doesn't take into account the context of the Anime and manga project and if the article is actually needed. The content exists on other pages in the proper context, there is no need for this list article as it has outlived it's usefulness.

I do not believe we even really need a redirect here. I would also argue for a speedy delete to restore the original due process. SephyTheThird (talk) 02:38, 14 January 2016 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Anime and manga-related deletion discussions.SephyTheThird (talk) 02:50, 14 January 2016 (UTC)


 *  Speedy delete Prod had a technical problem. It is pointless to have a second franchise article when the main Doraemon article covers the franchise. AngusWOOF ( bark  •  sniff ) 02:56, 14 January 2016 (UTC) updated 15:51, 15 January 2016 (UTC)


 * It is a contested prod, the process was WP:PROD which allows contesting and restore. If you want to request a speedy delete, be aware that the deletion was already controversial, for at least one person, and speedy delete is only for non-controversial deletions. So instead please give a clear delete reason instead, so there is a consensus, and so that the process is not easily contested. I am not voting to keep or delete, just no speedy delete. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 03:00, 14 January 2016 (UTC)


 * Fair enough. Also wanted to add that Doraemon already has a navbox in case someone was looking for a simpler organized list than the main franchise page. AngusWOOF ( bark  •  sniff ) 15:51, 15 January 2016 (UTC)


 * Also List of media of Doraemon, a redirect to this, should be considered/deleted at the same time. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 03:06, 14 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions.  sst  ✈  05:10, 14 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Japan-related deletion discussions.  sst  ✈  05:10, 14 January 2016 (UTC)


 * Delete as redundant to Doraemon, which already discusses all the entries in prose. In addition, navbox and category already serve as navigation tools. (Redirect seems fine.) — HELL KNOWZ  ▎TALK 12:05, 14 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Redirect: I will amend mine to a redirect based upon the Wikipedia-wide principal of a frowned-upon fork, as noted below by Prisencolin. Fylbecatulous talk 19:08, 14 January 2016 (UTC) Keep : actually, an article or a list can have life outside a WikiProject. The only reasons being served up for deletion are related to the Anime and manga project itself. There is no outside argument being exerted for this list article's deletion. I represent WikiProject Cats, by the way; because this article still shows up on our watchlist since historically it had our project banner on the talk page. Just call me a member of the reading public outside of your "Anime and manga project", who does consider this deletion request controversial. I really dislike WikiProjects exerting power to control an article.   Fylbecatulous talk 13:00, 14 January 2016 (UTC)
 * So your keep argument boils down to it being nominated by a wiki project? I hope you have a better reasoning than that. Especially considering that you claim to represent a project that has an extremely tenuous link to the subject. Exactly what is your reason for wanting to keep this page that is related to it's contents and usefulness? On content grounds it is not a controversial topic, the content is located elsewhere in an actual developed article so it's not like we are deleting an article with growth potential. The "controversy" has been made on technical points rather than the content. If you wish to make a keep argument at least do so based on something stronger than your views on wikiprojects. SephyTheThird (talk) 13:25, 14 January 2016 (UTC)
 * My reason is not related to WP Anime and Manga (or any project) and I am not a member. You shouldn't generalize all participants like that. This AfD appears in 6 different project lists. — HELL KNOWZ  ▎TALK 13:30, 14 January 2016 (UTC)

...Nor is mine. I said consider me part of the reading public outside your project. Which is what I am. Nor will I accept any mistreatment or incivility from anyone irregardless of whether my reason is based upon your perception of a technical point. Civility reighs supreme. sigh... Fylbecatulous <b style="color:#DB7093">talk</b> 13:43, 14 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Why are you directing this at me? I have been nothing but polite. You said There is no outside argument and I pointed out that there is at least one person besides you. your perception of a technical point - I have not mentioned any technical points. — HELL KNOWZ  ▎TALK 14:26, 14 January 2016 (UTC)
 * , it appears we have been the victim of edit conflicts. I have uninndented my remark. My post was to SephyTheThird. I should have thanked you for your post in my defense earlier, but I do so now.  Sorry for the misplaced comment of mine. It was not to you.  Alas.  <b style="color:#595454">Fylbecatulous</b> <b style="color:#DB7093">talk</b> 14:35, 14 January 2016 (UTC)
 * , thank you, in relief. <b style="color:#595454">Fylbecatulous</b> <b style="color:#DB7093">talk</b> 14:41, 14 January 2016 (UTC)


 * Delete or Redirect: To be clear, there's nothing wrong with the content itself, but this is a WP:REDUNDANTFORK. 206.41.25.114 (talk) 14:14, 14 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Redirect I was unaware this was a WP:REDUNDANTFORK of content on another article, but I don't see a readon to outright delete the article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Prisencolin (talk • contribs) 18:26, 14 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Redirect to Doraemon, where the content is better covered. As a long-standing page, a redirect seems clearly useful in case there are external links to the page or just people who have viewed it before and want to find where the content is now covered.  Furthermore, since content was split from this page to other pages like List of Doraemon video games, keeping the page history will help with attribution for the past edits to that content. Calathan (talk) 19:52, 14 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete I was the one who had originally prodded the article, the nav box and Doraemon covers the franchise extensively. The redirect "List of Doraemon media" is not going to be a likely search term. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 02:52, 16 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Redirect to Doraemon.  Ana  r  chyte   03:57, 16 January 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.