Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Power level (Dragon Ball)

 This page is an archive of the proposed deletion of the article below. Further comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or on a Votes for Undeletion nomination). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was delete. Eugene van der Pijll 17:56, 15 August 2005 (UTC)

Power level (Dragon Ball)
Not appropriate for Wikibooks, and a list of power levels is not encyclopediatic. Delete. A Link to the Past 21:07, August 7, 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete nn.  Grue   21:13, 7 August 2005 (UTC)
 * There is no reason to delete the list or the article which precedes it. Statistics are often listed in encyclopedias. This article also does not fall into the category of "What Wilkipedia is not". Keep. Socar15 21:25, 7 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Problem: The article doesn't provide encyclopediatic information. The list of power levels is not information that is necessary. Statistics on, say, population in a city in an article ON the city is necessary. -- A Link to the Past 21:30, August 7, 2005 (UTC)
 * How do you define "information that is necessary"? The article is more then just a list of numbers, it's an article on power levels, which is a very important aspect of the DBZ series. The article explains their uses, the history of them, and some other details. The article itself IS necessary for DBZ because power levels play such an important role almost a third of the entire series. And it can be argued that the numbers themselves that go along with that article are also necessary. Socar15 21:42, 7 August 2005 (UTC)
 * If you take away this information, which is valuable only to DBZ fans, it would work out just fine. Problem is, a merge of the rest of the information is unnecessary; we wouldn't need several paragraphs of information in the main article. It can be wittled down to a single paragraph, or even less. -- A Link to the Past 21:47, August 7, 2005 (UTC)
 * How did you determine that this article specifically is only valuable to DBZ fans? How would say, an article on a specific character, be any different? If an individual read something that referred to DBZ power levels (which is a pretty common thing) and went to look them up, I would think that the article would be very useful to someone who didn't know much about the topic itself. In this case, I don't believe deletion or a merge is necessary. Socar15 21:52, 7 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. Smells suspiciously like fancruft to me. Denelson83 21:58, 7 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Comment. Why isn't this appropriate for Wikibooks?  Is there a Dragon Ball Wikibook?  - Thatdog 23:18, 7 August 2005 (UTC)
 * I was quoting the one guy that said Keep; he claimed that there was not enough content to move it to Wikibooks, that it's not big enough to be a guide. -- A Link to the Past 23:30, August 7, 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete, fancruftGateman1997 23:22, 7 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep, encyclopedic description of a notable aspect of DBZ DB. Kappa 00:17, 8 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Notable aspect of DBZ, you say? And by the way, power levels were not in DB, arose in DBZ, ended two sagas in, didn't appear in the GT series, and most of the article is a list of unencyclopediatic content. If it's taken away, then it's reduced to nothing, and if merged, it would be trimmed to a few sentences. -- A Link to the Past 00:22, August 8, 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete, nonencyclopedic, nonnotable, pointless. Nandesuka 02:06, 8 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. nn exposition device. frequently parodied. Nifboy 17:19, 9 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete My only question is "how the hell did this last several months before being VfD?". The worst kind of cruft. - SoM 17:08, 15 August 2005 (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 an undeletion request). No further edits should be made to this page.