Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Pokémon (21-40) (2nd nomination)


 * 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 NO CONSENSUS TO DELETE. Herostratus 10:00, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

List of Pokémon (21-40)

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

This page is pointless. There's no need for a small synopsis when one can be found on every Pokémon's respective page. Cipher (Talk to the hand) 13:23, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete Suggest creation of a new category which will dynamically list each entry. That way, the notable subjects (with their respective articles) will be included in a single directory. This will also spare all the extra effort that might be spent on maintaining this list. --Aarktica 14:41, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Conditional keep per related AfD Articles for deletion/Porygon evolutionary line. The Pokemon wikiproject seems to be in the midst of a large merger project involving these articles, and given the scope of the effort I am willing to allow them some time to complete the merge.  Suggest revisiting this issue after a month or so to check for progress, and if its still in a poor state, relist here at AfD.  Ark yan  &#149; (talk) 16:08, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep See my reasoning at Articles for deletion/Porygon evolutionary line - it also applies here. -Jeske (v^_^v) 16:15, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Speedy keep, per my reasoning in Articles for deletion/List of Pokémon (1-20) (2nd nomination). -- Dennis The Tiger   (Rawr and stuff) 17:39, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Speedy keep per above.--Zxcvbnm 20:36, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Speedy keep per above. Merger in progress.  If nominator opposes merger, discussion at WT:POKE is the more appropriate venue. hbdragon88 06:20, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment: I should notify everyone that using the series of descriptive, supplemental List pages of which this page is a part of may not be the only way to cover the many Pokemon species that don't have evolutionary relatives (which is actually the purpose of this page; to fill in the gaps left behind by merging Pokemon into evolutionary line pages like Porygon evolutionary line). I have proposed what could be a viable alternative to this series of pages at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Pok%C3%A9mon/Layout; everyone may want to hold a discussion over there about that. If that plan gets consensus, I will support deleting this page. Erik Jensen (Appreciate 20:54, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete If it ain't broken, don't fix it.— Ryūlóng ( 竜龍 ) 23:08, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Speedy keep, per reasoning in other AfD. - A Link to the Past (talk) 05:40, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment: I heavily doubt that anyone here voting "Delete" (including the nominator and excepting Ryulong) has read any of the debates over at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Pokémon or Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Pokémon/Layout. -Jeske (v^_^v) 21:36, 23 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Strong Delete For the exactly the same reason as I had here.
 * But your reasoning is not based on notability, but your personal preference. You want it one way, so you use the AfD and say "rather than assert a policy or guideline violation in it existing, I'll say "I don't like it". - A Link to the Past (talk) 01:21, 26 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Strong delete, same as the list of 1-20.--Michaelritchie200 17:07, 26 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Your reasoning uses the exceptions. -Jeske (v^_^v) 17:11, 26 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Bulbasaur, Treecko and Lugia, for more examples, are all pretty important. I also say Delete because no one has even completed this page yet. Maybe because it's up for deletion but it sat there for a couple of weeks before that and wasn't edited. Michaelritchie200 07:22, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Besides, does it make that much difference to the running of Wikipedia if each Pokemon has its own page? If we do this, does it mean we have to chop down the number of character pages for Harry Potter, Digimon and Final Fantasy and other character heavy games. Michaelritchie200 07:24, 28 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Strong keep Reeks of making a point. See reasoning at other pokemon related nominations. G1  gg  y  !  04:11, 28 May 2007 (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.