Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of villains and monsters in Powerpuff Girls Z


 * 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. This is unsourced original research as it stands and none of the Keep votes addressed this problem. If anyone would like it userfied to work on, please contact me or another admin. Black Kite 00:11, 15 March 2010 (UTC)

List of villains and monsters in Powerpuff Girls Z

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

Unsourced fancruft, WP:OR. Anything really useful in this can be folded into the main article. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 03:44, 7 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete and don't bother with a merge. Nothing keepable here. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Many otters • One bat • One hammer) 03:51, 7 March 2010 (UTC)


 * Delete No references to show notability or verify accuracy. Jim Heaphy (talk) 04:24, 7 March 2010 (UTC)


 * Delete- no sources, nothing but original research. This is both fan- and list cruft. Reyk  YO!  07:47, 7 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Anime and manga-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 18:14, 7 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 18:14, 7 March 2010 (UTC)
 * 'Keep List of characters, list of villains/creatures/monsters/enemies, etc. are fine for Wikipedia. Those who hate list always say delete, those who like them say keep, and sometimes the article is kept, and sometimes not.  Depends whoever is around at the time to comment, and the opinions of the closing administrator.  These types of articles come up to AFD so many times, with such random outcomes, why don't we just flip a coin to decide?   D r e a m Focus  15:02, 8 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment Because there are other policy concerns—e.g. WP:V—to consider. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 15:22, 8 March 2010 (UTC)
 * You can verify fictional content from the primary source. No one is doubting that there are villains and monsters in this series.  Some of them on the list have their own articles even.   D r e a m Focus  15:36, 8 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment And per WP:SOURCES, while primary sources are certainly allowable, third-party coverage is best. If this is simply a recapitulation of episode summaries, that is a perfectly reasonable rationale for deletion. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 16:15, 8 March 2010 (UTC)
 * It should be known Dream Focus has no real reason for wanting the article kept. It being a list and being "fine" for Wikipedia isn't a reason, it's an "I Like it" excuse. RobJ1981 (talk) 03:20, 9 March 2010 (UTC)


 * Keep The nominator is proposing a merger and so we should retain the article for its edit history and content per our licensing policy. Colonel Warden (talk) 00:33, 9 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete Unsourced trivial listcruft/fancruft at best. RobJ1981 (talk) 03:20, 9 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep appropriate combination article, the best alternative to an article on each one of them. Not unsourceable, since it is sourceable from the work it self .  a list of the characters in a significant fiction is appropriate detail, not excessive.    DGG ( talk ) 06:58, 9 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete - fancruft. Shadowjams (talk) 07:55, 9 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete. There is nothing to merge.  We do not merge in/out unsourced material which violates WP:NOR policy.  JBsupreme  ( talk ) 08:47, 9 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep Perfectly acceptable spinout to keep the main article form growing too long. Edward321 (talk) 15:07, 13 March 2010 (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.