Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Other Rangers and Ranger-like allies (2nd nomination)


 * 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   keep.  MBisanz  talk 01:46, 23 October 2008 (UTC)

Other Rangers and Ranger-like allies
AfDs for this article: 
 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

Content lacks coverage in reliable sources. The only sources I found so far are mirror sites. I had previously nominated this article for deletion due to its title. If there are any sources, show me. But I doubt any sources will be mentioned.

Also nominating these for the fact that reliable sources are not present: While the content is notable, the content is not verifiable. If these articles get deleted, I request that someone make these articles redirects to Power Rangers. I recommend that before you voice your opinion here, you read the previous nomination first. — Mythdon ( talk  •  contribs ) 15:20, 18 October 2008 (UTC) Zagalejo^^^ 22:13, 18 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Red Ranger
 * Blue Ranger
 * Green Ranger
 * Yellow Ranger
 * Pink Ranger
 * Black Ranger
 * White Ranger
 * Keep: This is getting ridiculous, Mythdon. You don't send articles to AFD because there is something wrong with the content that can clearly be fixed. You send them to AFD if you cannot find any sources. There is nothing in these articles that aren't mentioned elsewhere on Wikipedia where there are reliable sources. This batch AFD does not work in this case. And I am frankly getting tired of your seeking process for the sake of process.— Ryūlóng ( 竜龙 ) 20:10, 18 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions.   --  treelo  radda  21:52, 18 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fictional characters-related deletion discussions.   --  treelo  radda  21:52, 18 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep Nothing here is effectively different from the previous nomination. Way too much info, with sourcing, for deletion to be the best course; moreover, it seemed reasonable in the PRIOR nomination to rename or redirect the article -- it is, after all, a subarticle that illuminates the larger project. As for the other articles on each of the "main" Power Rangers, they're clearly notable, and in something with as many television series, comics, online media, toys, etc. etc. etc. there are two very reliable sources: the primary source (which, as far as I can tell, could be found by someone with the time and desire to do it, if not already sufficiently done), and likely a good number of tvguide or other television media articles from third party sources out there in the intertubes. Maybe I'm wrong... but it seems like a lot of painstaking effort would needlessly go down the drain on these, if they're deleted. My .02. JasonDUIUC (talk) 22:10, 18 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment I have no opinion about the "other rangers and ranger-like allies", but I'd be surprised if one couldn't scrounge up some good out-of-universe info on each member of the core group. There are several analytical works that discuss the Power Rangers: for example, this and this.
 * Also, correct me if I'm wrong here.... but, Mythdon, shouldn't you have attempted to notify the original author of this article by putting a notice in his/her talk page? I know that for the main AfD article and the Red Ranger one, you seem to have neglected to do so... maybe it just slipped your mind? or you're in the middle of it as I type this right now?..... Cheers.JasonDUIUC (talk) 22:14, 18 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Weak delete - The article states that this is an "unofficial designation". However, the other named articles are absolutely notable subjects.  These characters are commonly parodied and satired and would qualify as notable. LeilaniLad (talk) 22:19, 18 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep - Here's the deal: Mythdon is just looking for attention.  Yes, I did just go there.  Instead of nominating the article for deletion, perhaps he should put in that notice that says "This article needs additional references for citation."  That would point out that there is a lot of unverified (but not necessarily unverifiable) information.  You know what, I think Mythdon is just on a mission to have every single Power Rangers article except the most basic ones (like the ones for the series and the Power Rangers core article) deleted simply because he doesn't like the Power Rangers.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dstebbins (talk • contribs) 22:26, 18 October 2008 (UTC)
 * i see nothing to indicate that it is not a good faith nomination. People can have a variety of views on articles such as this. DGG (talk) 01:37, 20 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep as per Ryulong. As Zagalejo shows, sources exist. Edward321 (talk) 22:33, 19 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep the main article as it passed AFD only a few months ago and I see no reason to reverse the decision. It's no different than a "list of minor characters" article which has been established by precedent as being acceptable for Wikipedia. Keep the individual articles, too, as these are the main characters in a massive international entertainment franchise spanning multiple television series and films. 23skidoo (talk) 13:17, 20 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete as there is no evidence that the characters in this article/list are notable, either jointly or individually, and its content, drawn from primary sources, is a clear breach of WP:SYNTHESIS. --Gavin Collins (talk) 12:49, 21 October 2008 (UTC)
 * The characters in all 8 articles are notable, as these are lists of characters that are extensions of other articles. The fact that the only sources currently used as references should be not be a reason for deletion.— Ryūlóng ( 竜龙 ) 23:07, 21 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep. "Transformational Magic: Some Japanese superheroes and monsters" (found by Zagalejo in The Worlds of Japanese Popular Culture) devotes a whole section to these (stock) characters and their significance.--Nohansen (talk) 23:42, 21 October 2008 (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.