Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of fictional characters who can heal


 * 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. If anyone wishes to categorize, they may. Sr13 05:03, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

List of fictional characters who can heal

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Listcruft at its worst. Indescriminate collection of information, collection of loosely associated topics, broad and poorly defined criteria, virtually impossible to maintain if it ever tries to be complete, questionable utility, etc. Indrian 00:35, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
 * delete and turn into a category, would work better that way. Kwsn (Ni!) 01:04, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep or bring back the category which was deleted so that this list could be created instead. --tjstrf talk 01:04, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete - categorize. --Haemo 01:31, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete Wikipedia is not the place to categorize everything that fictional characters can or cannot do.  Up next would be List of fictional characters who speak English  Corpx 01:45, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete unless someone can rationally explain the notability of the article and how it can be linked to articles that people read and search for. List is also incomplete.  Star Trek had some healers.  In a way, all fictional characters can potential heal the audience from their daily troubles while they are entertained. Fineday 02:08, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete - while a bit of a stretch, I could see an academic argument for the value of a category for characters with restorative powers - but as a list? No, thanks. --Action Jackson IV 02:10, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete then turn into catagorize. Oysterguitarst 02:53, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete and turn into category. That article needs a better title.  I thought everyone can heal.  --thedemonhog talk • edits 02:57, 4 July 2007 (UTC)


 * keep- no this was a category before and it was decided to be a list, dont touch it! -hotspot
 * Delete and leave the category dead too. GassyGuy 06:27, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete Indescriminate and far too broad. Fictional characters come from movies, tv, comic books, video games, anime, Dungeons & Dragons, trading cards, theatre, folklore, etc. This loose list wouldn't do much good in a category either, unless perhaps they were refined into subcats. Still, I don't see the usefulness in associating articles in such a way. --Breno talk 07:43, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete - consider turning it into a category. Tim{speak} 21:57, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete - categorize. Bart133 (t) (c) 02:41, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment For those arguing to convert this into a category, please be aware that this, along with a series of similarly named lists, were created as a result of a CfD where the result was that those specific cats be converted into lists and the cats deleted as overly broad, hard to maintain, and, generally, unwieldy in title length for usability. If the same, or similar, arguments hold that a list is also unacceptable for Wiki, just trash it and be done with it, let's not bounce it back and forth between the two states, which is very likely to happen. - J Greb 16:53, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
 * I dont think we need to categorize fictional characters in this detail. List of fictional characters who wear underwear over their pants ?? Corpx 16:57, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
 * I think a lot of you are misunderstanding what the list/category is for. It's not for anyone who can recover from a wound, nor for doctors, it's for supernatural healing abilities, white mages, etc. (We have another list for supernatural regenerators.) This is not a trivial categorization at all, and the purpose of creating a list was so that we could have a more properly defined category. I wouldn't particularly mind moving back to the category system, now that the definition has been worked out. --tjstrf talk 17:05, 5 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete Sherlock Holmes' "good friend, Dr. Watson" would fit into this nonsensical list. Carlossuarez46 17:32, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
 * So his medical doctorate, as well as that any fictional physician, constitutes a "paranormal or superhuman ability"? And yes, that criteria has been part of the list text from the out set. Make you wonder if the title was the only thing noted before voicing an opinion... - J Greb 17:43, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Qualifications that make the list no longer match the article title are useless and don't serve any meaningful function other than to try to skirt AfD's - and may well be ignored. Notwithstanding that, some of Dr. Watson's cures according to A.C.Doyle his creator were near miraculous, seems superhuman or paranormal by most normal uses of those words. Carlossuarez46 22:47, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete. And unfortunately, categorizing fictional characters by their powers is considered blasphemy over on CSD, so we'd likely just continue this vicious cycle. --Hemlock Martinis 08:32, 8 July 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.