Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rubber-Band Man (Static Shock)


 * 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   delete. Secret account 16:50, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

Rubber-Band Man (Static Shock)

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

This character does not establish notability independent of Static Shock through the inclusion of real world information from reliable, third party sources. Most of the information is made up of original research and unnecessary plot details. There is no current assertion for future improvement of the article, so extended coverage is unnecessary. TTN (talk) 22:21, 3 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Redirect to a list of characters and merge heavily reduced information (which would take care of referencing issues). There's enough reliable sources on any named fictional universe if you bother looking it up. I'll cite the main AFD page:
 * "If the page can be improved, this should be solved through regular editing, rather than deletion."
 * "Read the article to properly understand its topic. Note that stubs and imperfect articles are awaiting further development and so the potential of the topic should be considered."
 * "Consider making the page a useful redirect or proposing it be merged rather than deleted. Neither of these actions requires an AfD."
 * "When nominating an article for deletion due to sourcing concerns, a good-faith attempt should be made to confirm that such sources aren't likely to exist."

TTN has not shown any attempt at finding sources before making the nomination. - Mgm|(talk) 00:17, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep and consider about redirect on the article talk page. I note that real world information is present. 05:31, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete Does not establish notability through significant coverage of real world context in reliable secondary sources independent of the subject. Jay32183 (talk) 08:23, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep and consider a merge on the relevant talk page. It's an abuse of deletion process to propose an article for deletion which can be merged, at least without saying why it it shouldnt be merged or redirected. Perhaps the last sentence of the nom says that, but I can't tell what it means. . DGG (talk) 14:42, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
 * There are no sources, it can't be merged. No matter how reasonable the redirect is, it is not a reason to preserve the history of content we're getting rid of. We can, and should, delete the article then make a redirect. Jay32183 (talk) 21:01, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
 * There are sources, and they are mentioned in the article. The episodes, "Stringer", "Where the Rubber Meets the Road", "They're Playing My Song (Season one)", and "Bad Stretch" are all cited in the article, as well as the published comic Static #34. DHowell (talk) 04:06, 6 December 2008 (UTC)
 * None of which are secondary sources. Jay32183 (talk) 06:17, 6 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep or merge, and discuss which to do on the relevant talk pages. Most of the content here is verifiable, whether or not it is notable. DHowell (talk) 04:06, 6 December 2008 (UTC)
 * If it isn't notable then "keep" isn't an option. If you're going to argue to keep an article that's been brought up on notability issues, you need to show that it is notable. Jay32183 (talk) 06:17, 6 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete: Not notable enough. Ryan 4314   (talk) 05:34, 8 December 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.