Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mantrid


 * 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   merge to Lexx. -- RoySmith (talk) 17:46, 3 February 2014 (UTC)

Mantrid

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

This does not establish notability independent of Lexx through the inclusion of real world information from reliable, third party sources. Most of the information is made up of plot details better suited to Wikia. There is no current assertion for future improvement of the article, so extended coverage is unnecessary. TTN (talk) 03:02, 5 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Redirect to Lexx. Not notable. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 17:51, 5 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 22:23, 5 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science fiction-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 22:23, 5 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 22:23, 5 January 2014 (UTC)


 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Guerillero  &#124;  My Talk  06:31, 14 January 2014 (UTC)

 
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Northamerica1000(talk) 07:29, 25 January 2014 (UTC)


 * Merge unless someone does the work to meet WP:BURDEN for which there are enough third party independent cites available. If the cites are added, then change to Keep. VMS Mosaic (talk) 07:40, 25 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete - Precedence does not trump policy, and the most basic policy in AfDs is the WP:GNG. To quote: "If a topic has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject, it is presumed to be suitable for a stand-alone article or list." There might be other series in which AfDs have been filed on lead characters, and those articles were kept, but in order for to have happened, there needed to have been reliable, third party sources. In this case, I'm not seeing them. As a main character, this person would deserve mention in some capacity in the main article on the series, but without meeting the GNG, it should not be a stand-alone article.  S ven M anguard   Wha?  06:12, 1 February 2014 (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.