Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Star Wars Sith 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 delete. Proto :: type  10:09, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

List of Star Wars Sith characters
Delete. A small list of links. A complete repeat of Category:Sith and so on. Completely unnecessary, as one can clearly see. &mdash; Deckill e r 00:39, 25 October 2006 (UTC)


 * Delete per nom. Yes, this is clearly redundant. Andrew Levine 05:00, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. Mukadderat 18:10, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep per Categories, lists, and series boxes which clearly states that the generally accepted consensus is that "Wikipedia offers three ways to create groupings of articles: categories, lists, and article series boxes. Each has its own advantages and disadvantages, and each is appropriate in different circumstances. These methods should not be considered to be in competition with each other. Rather, they are most effective when used in synergy, each one complementing the other." None of the red links in this list are in the category (nor can they ever be), which demonstrates their non-redundancy. The fact that lists CAN have red links for articles that have not yet been created, is a strong argument in their favor. Alansohn 03:51, 26 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment: I am pretty sure the purpose of the text bolded there is not to say that we should have overlap within a given subject. It's saying that some subjects are best served with catgories, some with lists, and some with series boxes, and Wikipedia as a whole should not universally favor one over the others. Further down on the guideline, it says that lists "may be redundant with categories if not formatted, annotated, or equipped with invisible links," which is true of the present list. (Also, both "Darth Imperius" and "Darth Xio Jade" have been previously deleted and should probably not be recreated as articles.) Andrew Levine 05:22, 26 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment Actually, it's pretty clearly stated that These methods should not be considered to be in competition with each other. Rather, they are most effective when used in synergy, each one complementing the other. I agree that lists may be redundant with categories, but the inclusion of red links of articles to be created (even allowing for the removal of deleted articles), means that this list is NOT redundant. Categories AND lists; perfect together. Alansohn 05:29, 26 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Most of those redlinks are fannon or hoaxes, so they are unencyclopedic in the first place, and don't belong on a list anyway. Furthermore, because of the cruft dam strategy, any encyclopedia-worthy character will appear in the true sith list, List of minor Sith characters, which will in turn make that list all blue links, and therefore make it obsolete. If an individual sith is not listed in the category, it will be on List of minor Sith characters; it's that simple. (As an aside, redlink requests should be done on the WikiProject page) &mdash; Deckill e r 13:02, 26 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete/Redirect. It does seem that this list is redundant with List of minor Sith characters, though if someone can give me a good reason why this list provides some unique benefit that the other does not, I might be willing to change my mind. --Elonka 20:03, 26 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep/expand. I'd tend to redirect it to Sith, but there should be place for an alphabetical and annoted version combining it with List of minor Sith characters. -- User:Docu
 * 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.