Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/TMF/A-803 LaGOWE


 * 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. -- Cirt (talk) 19:59, 8 June 2011 (UTC)

TMF/A-803 LaGOWE

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Fails WP:GNG, and violates our guidelines on coverage of fiction. Merging of content seems an unlikely solution as the list List of Mobile Suit Gundam SEED mobile weapons has been deleted via a discussion. There is no significant coverage in reliable third party sources. Anthem 10:56, 29 May 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete per nom, notability issues and all plot pretty much cover this article. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 04:51, 2 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Restore List of Mobile Suit Gundam SEED mobile weapons and merge there per my comments at Articles for deletion/GAT-01 Strike Dagger. —Farix (t &#124; c) 01:28, 6 June 2011 (UTC)
 * As I've mentioned elsewhere, restoring an article which has been deleted by consensus at AFD requires you to use the venue of deletion review. --Anthem 06:01, 6 June 2011 (UTC)


 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Crisco 1492 (talk) 07:52, 6 June 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete. Article is WP:JUSTPLOT, fails the WP:GNG, and does not admit to notability by any secondary criteria. Not enough coverage in sources indepedent of the subject to expand beyond a stub, once unsourced information derived from WP:PRIMARY sources is removed. — chro • man • cer 16:01, 6 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete: Per nomination. The subject of the article, a fictional weapon, does not meet the general notability guideline and it is a plot-only description of a fictional work. The article is unreferenced and with no reliable third-party sources there is no valid reason to keep the article. A search engine test does not show anything different to presume otherwise. Jfgslo (talk) 23:50, 7 June 2011 (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.