Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of RiverClan Cats


 * 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. Article inappropriate for wikipedia but has been transferred to wikia with edit history. Moonriddengirl (talk) 14:21, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

List of RiverClan Cats

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

A list of non notable unsourced fictional cats. Clear fancruft and listcruft. The article is tagged as requiring cleanup, being too long, emulating a fan site, lacking citations, being unverified, and lacking notability. S.dedalus (talk) 06:56, 28 November 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete per nomination. --S.dedalus (talk) 06:57, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom, though other "List of X Clan cats" lists should also be included. Collectonian (talk) 09:03, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete. Non-notable fictional animals. -- Mikeblas (talk) 15:19, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep. We've worked extremely hard on these articles, on getting all the cats down and including the descriptions, and even took the time to organize and alphabetize these. "Non-notable fictional animals"? Have you read Warriors? "Non-notable" is a very large understatement. These cats are vital to the series of Warriors. If you think these are non-notable, you might as well delete every other article on fiction on Wikipedia. I see absolutely no reason whatsoever to delete this. Lakestorm (talk) 21:54, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment. Please read WP:EFFORT. Unfortunate the amount of effort editors have put into an article does not mean it meets Wikipedia guidelines. I believe there are quit sufficient reasons why this article should be deleted; lack of notability, fancruft, and lack of available “out of universe” sources for example. --S.dedalus (talk) 23:09, 28 November 2007 (UTC)


 * Keep. Going with what Lakestorm said, this is a contributing list of characters from the Warriors series. This can't be considered listcruft. There is vital information in this article, along with the other Clan character articles, and it shouldn't be rid of that easily. And being that, there are lots of other articles on fiction novels that aren't sourced or cited because the information is given through the books! This is why this is labeled as fiction. Going with that, since ALL of this information is given through the books, this is most definitely NOT fancruft. There is, truly, no reason to delete this article.  §ροττεδςταr (Talk 23:23, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Please see WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. As I said above, there is no stated notability for these fictional animals, and unless significant out of universe sources can be found, this page cannot be referenced. --S.dedalus (talk) 23:34, 28 November 2007 (UTC)(edit to add) If there are significant external sources available, please feel free to add them. Articles that can only be referenced from the source text are usually considered incompatible with notability and verifiability standards. --S.dedalus (talk) 23:52, 28 November 2007 (UTC)


 * Comment The successful deletion of other “Warrior cat X” pages such as this one may be relevant to the current discussion. WP:NOT Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information. --S.dedalus (talk) 23:30, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete fails WP:WAF, WP:Plot, WP:RS, and many other polices and guidelines. Be prepared for sockpuppets, last time we deleted a warriors article we were flooded with meat puppets from a warriors fan board. Ridernyc (talk) 02:08, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment You don't have to keep bringing that up, you know. It's really quite insulting. Lakestorm (talk) 11:56, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment People giving our fandom such a terrible name is a shame to those of us who try and acquit ourselves as real members of this organization. When our articles fail to meet policies, we have to accept it and work to improve things (and do Deletion Reviews if things change) rather than attacking people for doing their job. I believe in my vote (see below) and hope that will help keep the meat-puppet response to a minimum. (edited to add my sig, sorry) Kitsufox ( Fox's Den ) 18:51, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Transwiki to Warriors Wiki While it fails many Wikipedia policies, it could be worked into the articles that are already in place there. I see no reason why people's work should be completely disregarded, even though the article in it's current form is not suitable to WWiki, the information that's been accumulated should not be thrown aside. Kitsufox ( Fox's Den ) 18:48, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep or as Kitsufox said Transwiki This is not just fancruft, it is very useful information on the series. It is long only because of the many cats in the series, if you want it shorter we'll have to do individual charcter pages, and then I'm sure you'll go around deleting all of those too. Wikipedian users work hard to keep these warriors articles safe from vandalism and fanwork. You can tell by many of the discussions on the talk page. ClawClaw (talk) 20:50, 29 November 2007 (UTC)


 * If individual character pages would be deleted as you say, why is any better if all these non notable correctors are on one page? They’re still not notable. Yes, some Wikipedians work hard on these pages. See WP:EFFORT. It doesn’t make the article notable. --S.dedalus (talk) 02:29, 30 November 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete per the nomination and Ridernyc's reasonings. I think that the other "List of ____Clan Cats" (see Warriors) need to be considered too.  Also, do not transwiki because, as far as I know the standards, we do not transwiki articles to Wikia wikis.  (Can anyone confirm this?) Metros (talk) 21:28, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
 * think you have that backwards, the only wikis we transwiki to are wikia wikis. I was going to nominate the other articles, but I"m in the middle of cleaning up and nominating tons of TV episodes. It's only a mater of time until someone tries to get me banned again. Ridernyc (talk) 23:37, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
 * No, I thought we only transwikied to Wikipedia-related wikis (Wiktionary, Wikisource, etc.) and not Wikia. Metros (talk) 23:47, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
 * WP:FICT clearly states to transwiki this type of stuff to an appropriate wikia project. in fact there is even a special wiki just for placing things until a home can be found for it Wikia Annex. Ridernyc (talk) 00:08, 30 November 2007 (UTC)


 * Keep This is information that is valuable to the novels -  it's more than just cruft in my eyes.  This article seems to fall well within the realm of material that consensus among WIkipedia users finds acceptable/encyclopedic. Slideshow Bob (talk) 02:16, 30 November 2007 (UTC)
 * The page cannot be sourced other than from the novel. From WP:IS, “It has been noticed, however, that some articles are sourcing their sole content from the topic itself, which creates a level of bias within an article. Where this primary source is the only source available on the topic, this bias is impossible to correct.” --S.dedalus (talk) 02:39, 30 November 2007 (UTC)
 * From WP:Plot "Summary descriptions of plot, characters, and settings are appropriate when paired with such real-world information, but not when they are the sole content of an article." there is no real world information or context in this article. Ridernyc (talk) 03:08, 30 November 2007 (UTC)


 * Note: This discussion has been added to the WikiProject Warriors To-do list. --User:Ceyockey ( talk to me ) 14:12, 8 December 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.