Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pokémon regions


 * 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. ItsZippy (talk • contributions) 15:08, 27 September 2012 (UTC)

Pokémon regions

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  Stats )

Whole article is a violation of WP:GAMEGUIDE and WP:VG/GL, which states that articles that are merely detailed descriptions of game levels are inappropriate. Further, there's no independent reliable sources here to verify notability of these levels in accordance with the general notability guideline. All the sources are the games themselves, or promotional materials such as web sites and game guides. There is no way this article can ever be improved to meet the WP:GNG or WP:NOT, because there are no sources that will allow us to write anything other than a description of the game levels. Shooterwalker (talk) 23:30, 18 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep: This isn't a page on "game levels". It's a list of the different settings that the many Pokémon video games, manga, anime television series, and anime films take place. There is also real world context included throughout the article which have reliable sources backing up that content. There is a link to a New York Times article, some video game reviews, some published books on the video games, as well as statements by the production team. It is not a "game guide" as it does not provide any actual detailed information as to how to play the video game. It states where each of the now 30+ video games, 750+ cartoon episodes, 15 films, and 11 different comic book adaptations are set, along with some of the fiction of the games where appropriate.— Ryulong ( 琉竜 ) 23:40, 18 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Again, WP:GAMEGUIDE is more than a statement of avoiding a "how-to" form. It also says that "detailed coverage of specific levels is also considered inappropriate." That principle is echoed at WP:VG/GL. It's hard to reconcile those principles with this article, which writes paragraph after paragraph about the Pokemon that are located in these levels, and a description of what the levels look like. Anything else is a WP:TRIVIALMENTION, which is insufficient to provide a real-world context to make this notable and not a game guide. Shooterwalker (talk) 00:02, 19 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Again, these are descriptions of the overall settings of the video games, anime, etc. These aren't "levels". This would be comparable to an article on Hyrule (which is not on Wikipedia) or Mushroom Kingdom (which is). The "Pokemon that are located in these levels" are simply summarizations of the fictional mythology presented within the video games, anime, etc., which for the most part could be removed, leaving simple paragraph long descriptions of the settings of the games of the main series. Your focus on this being a page on the different levels I believe is clouding your judgement of the article as a whole, as there are most certainly similar pages that appear throughout Wikipedia about other fictional settings. In fact, I think the Pokémon one is perhaps better sourced than what would normally be seen.— Ryulong ( 琉竜 ) 00:11, 19 September 2012 (UTC)
 * I've gone ahead and removed the content describing the fictional mythologies, seeing as you believe they are particularly problematic.— Ryulong ( 琉竜 ) 00:14, 19 September 2012 (UTC)
 * I understand the nominators concerns in general though. The current sourcing is troubling, almost all of the sources are first party (Game Freak's website, the official game guide) or of questionable reliablility. ("Nintendo Gamez"? A Twitter account?) I'm neutral at the moment, but unsure overall... Sergecross73   msg me   22:48, 19 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Also, the NY Times source is an extremely small, trivial mention. It's a mere 3 sentences, with only one sentence saying anything relevent to the topic. (Only the intrepid fan will grasp the full import as Ash, the human Pokemon trainer, and his little yellow pal, Pikachu, scramble around the Orange Islands on a mission to save the environment - Useful, yes, but significant coverage towards the WP:GNG?) Sergecross73   msg me   13:23, 20 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Anime and manga-related deletion discussions. — Frankie (talk) 21:49, 19 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. — Frankie (talk) 21:49, 19 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of video game-related deletion discussions . — Frankie (talk) 21:50, 19 September 2012 (UTC)


 * You can Google news archive search each regions name and the word "Pokemon" and see what appears. Is there enough coverage of each area to justify an article for it?   D r e a m Focus  13:40, 20 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Regarding your example at least, a large number of hits in the first few pages are just messageboard/forum posts of people discussing the games... Sergecross73   msg me   15:18, 20 September 2012 (UTC)
 * It's coverage of all of the settings on one page rather than an individual page for each setting. Perhaps if this was converted to a "List" page it might be better suited to Wikipedia.— Ryulong ( 琉竜 ) 00:31, 21 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Neutral - I wouldn't be apposed to deleting this because it could be considered a content fork. All this information could be found in the articles of the games they appear in, and a general setting section could be placed in the main Pokémon article. This article has always been a little awkward and I would be glad to be rid of it. Blake (Talk·Edits) 00:42, 21 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete - There isn't significant coverage in third party reliable sources to establish notability. No sort of real-world significance has been shown, it's all in-universe, borderline gameguide/plot information that looks more like it belongs in a Pokemon wikia, or as a subsection in respective Pokemon articles. Sergecross73   msg me   02:54, 21 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Weak Keep - While this article could definitely do with some referencing, but the references are enough - but barely - for it to establish notability. I do not believe that merging this into the respective games' sections will do more harm than good - this is a good place for viewers to see all the regions. The regions aren't confined to the games either, being prevalent in the anime. Article Feedback is also satisfactory. This article also seems to contain more worthwhile information than blatant WP:GAMECRUFT (e.g. In this region Ash caught a Raichu, etc, etc...). (Oh, and Pokémon Trainer doesn't have any references, so that would be a way better candidate for deletion...) Cyan Gardevoir  (used EDIT!) 09:18, 21 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Neutral (or, more accurately, unsure). Notability seems borderline. There are a number of directions with which to take the article, and although I don't think that outright deletion is the best option, I have no strong opinion on this one. We could keep the article, although with its iffy notability it would likely be renonimated at AfD. We could merge, either into Pokémon or the respective game articles, although merging into the games articles could get tricky, seeing as though each generation games has its own respective region, and each of generations of games is split into multiple games which have separate articles (for example, Pokémon Red and Blue and Pokémon Yellow both belong to Generation I, so where would information on Kanto be merged without redundancy?). The alternative solution to this problem would be to create articles on separate Pokémon generations, but that again seems redundant to the articles on the individual games. Merging into the main Pokémon article seems to be a better option, as it has a section on generations of the games here, although that section seems a bit bloated already. It already mentions some of the regions in passing, so perhaps we could amend it to mention all five briefly. Once that is done, we could either redirect this article to that section or delete it (although I think redirecting would be the better course of action here). As I said earlier, there are a number of directions with which we could take this article, and doing something with the aforementioned section in the main series article seems to be the best route. I'm just unsure of what. CtP  (t • c) 22:58, 22 September 2012 (UTC)
 * keep This is appropriate as a combination article, at a level of detail less than a game guide. The meaning of game guide is that the very specific material one would need only for playing but not for understanding. WP is intended for those who want to understand.  DGG ( talk ) 17:31, 23 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep Reading through the arguments I'm convinced it should be kept. The number of video games, cartoons, comic books, films, toys, etc. of this multi-billion dollar long running series, justifies listing information to help understand the franchise, and these things all take place in these locations.  It should be renamed to show it is a list article.   D r e a m Focus  23:54, 24 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Comment I would suggest trimming the article and having it remain as a List as Dream Focus suggested, with each region linking to the game in which it is featured in (or the season of the anime, if it is an anime-only location). There really aren't any sources that actually discuss the concept of the Pokemon regions as a group, and sources that focus on the individual regions at length would be more appropriately used to discuss the individual games in their own articles.  A lot of the more detailed information on the plot and background of each region would be better mentioned in the plot-based sections of each games article, and in most cases, they already are.  As a list, though, this can be a somewhat useful portal to the rest of the franchise, so I guess a Weak Keep would be the most appropriate vote for me.  Rorshacma (talk) 17:13, 25 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Weak keep – I loosely agree with the arguments that this is similar to Mushroom Kingdom, but the article needs work. Things like Kanto (Pokémon) being based off Kanto provides good real-world substance to the article, but should be sourced better and perhaps expanded upon as development of the regions. It would be difficult to merge the regions to individual articles because they span games, anime, manga, etc., but plot points from these works could be culled from this page. —Ost (talk) 19:46, 25 September 2012 (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.