Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Metroid (fictional species)


 * 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__EXPECTED_UNCONNECTED_PAGE__ to Characters in the Metroid series. Liz Read! Talk! 20:35, 27 July 2023 (UTC)

Metroid (fictional species)

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

Article is barely more than a stub, and hasn't seen improvement for the purposes of notability or SIGCOV since 2018. Trying to find sources to indicate it's important on its own has proven a bit fruitless which is, by and far, not helped by them sharing the series name. Ultimately I feel this would be better merged into the character list for now, the sources just aren't there. Kung Fu Man (talk) 01:53, 20 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Fictional elements and Video games. Kung Fu Man (talk) 01:53, 20 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Creator keep Passes WP:GNG, Metroids have SIGCOV in Aliens in Popular Culture p. 183-184, Good Game, and Destructoid, among others. While slim, it shows an AfD is not merited. Per WP:NOTMERGE, "Merging should be avoided if: The topics are discrete subjects warranting their own articles, with each meeting the General Notability Guidelines, even if short." ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 02:33, 20 July 2023 (UTC)
 * The Aliens book seen here in a preview seems to be discussing the Metroid universe as a whole, not the individual species in that significant a detail. Good Game is a series recap with a tongue in cheek comment at the end, and the Destructoid article is 90% a quotation of official sources with very little reaction at all.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 02:53, 20 July 2023 (UTC)
 * The problem is that page 184 is excluded from the preview; I assume it has the most discussion of the Metroid species with only a bit on pages 183 and 185. This is a common issue with book sources; per WP:OFFLINE. However, AfDs should not be biased against books. The book provably has an independent reaction from a secondary sourced author, specifically stating that Metroids demonstrate the cosmic balance should not be meddled with.
 * A tongue-in-cheek comment from a reliably sourced article does not render it totally null and void. It's clear that it is a factual description of the Metroids' history from a reliable secondary source unlinked to Nintendo.
 * In terms of further sources, I discovered a physics paper written about the realworld feasibility of Metroid Prime's abilities ingame. I assume there's even more stuff out there. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 05:25, 20 July 2023 (UTC)

Relisting comment: Relisting because no one has specified a target article to Merge to. There is Metroid, Metroid (video game) and probably other articles related to this series. I'm happy to Merge once you identify the target. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 02:10, 27 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Keep per sources provided by ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ. The Metroids seem like a notable topic, even if their article is stubby right now. The article needs some serious work, but I feel it's got the potential for further expansion. Pokelego999 (talk) 14:07, 20 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Keep, or draftify otherwise. There is enough for its own page. マリオマリオ (talk) 18:03, 27 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Merge Aliens in Popular Culture p. 183-185 discusses the game series and Samus. The species is mentioned, but is not a subject of any real discussion or analysis. The "physics paper" is "written, refereed and edited by undergraduate students". "I assume there's even more stuff out there." = WP:THEREMUSTBESOURCES Charcoal feather (talk) 12:22, 21 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Merge: Is there a particular reason why the information here cannot be mentioned in summary style in the main series article? The article right now feels like something from a fan wikia rather than a proper Wikipedia article. Independent notability is not established here at all. It is only mentioned when the press is running an article about the wider Metroid series. OceanHok (talk) 11:40, 24 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Merge I agree with OceanHok here that the article at present doesn't demonstrate why it can't be effectively summarized in a parent article. The sources given don't really seem to focus on the Metroid enough to meet SIGCOV. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs  talk 20:16, 24 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Merge at the parent article.  Greenish Pickle!   (🔔) 22:26, 25 July 2023 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * I think I'll be changing my vote to Merge given what's been said by other commenters. I agree that you could probably fit this whole thing into the Characters of Metroid article. Still, I wouldn't be opposed to this article coming back should sources end up turning up in the future. Pokelego999 (talk) 16:49, 27 July 2023 (UTC)


 * If it is to be merged, Characters in the Metroid series would undoubtedly be the best option here. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 05:38, 27 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Merge into Characters in the Metroid series. Without any other context, I would say coverage meets the threshold of WP:GNG and the presumption of notability is met...but many of the other editors make a good point that the actual volume of the coverage itself can easily be summarized in either the main series article as well as the characters' page. A standalone page would be redundant. Haleth (talk) 13:17, 27 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Comment: A page on the Baby Metroid (Metroid) character specifically has merits, reusing the special information from this Metroid (fictional species) page as background along with the extensive writing there has been on the mother-child relationship between Samus Aran and the Baby Metroid in the series, which served as the basis for Metroid: Other M. マリオマリオ (talk) 18:07, 27 July 2023 (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.