Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Toa (Bionicle)


 * 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   no consensus. Stifle (talk) 22:23, 15 November 2008 (UTC)

Toa (Bionicle)

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

This article was recreated and should not have been, as it has all the issues the old version of the article had, the chief one being lack of reliable sources and notability. This article has none, and should be deleted. Judgesurreal777 (talk) 06:33, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

Strong Keep The main character article is way too long, spliting it seemed wise at the time. If you delete it, I'm fine, I've saved the page and can reintigrate into the main Bionicle character page. --&#91;&#91;User:Tutthoth-Ankhre&#124;Tutthoth-Ankhre~ The Pharaoh of the Universe&#93;&#93; (talk) 14:02, 10 November 2008 (UTC) Keep or Merge. Looking at the Bionicle article, the Toa appear to be very important the the universe, being quote "Mata Nui's destined heroes and the main protagonists of the franchise.". I think that plenty of secondary sources could be found if anyone tried. -Drilnoth (talk) 15:03, 11 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete - sources given not independent or sufficient to establish notability outside Lego Bionicle universe, per WP:FICT.--Boffob (talk) 14:40, 10 November 2008 (UTC)
 * comment The so-called WP:FICT is an essay about which there is total disagreement. Many months of work have failed to find consensus for any version of it as a guideline, whether the more dogmatic versions --in any direction-- or   the more  reasonable. Many of us  would be very willing to have some version    adopted as a guideline, as a compromise to end this dispute, but that hasn't happened. Let's be realistic--whatever our own views, there is no general consensus. I may wish my own view on fiction had real consensus, but I can't say it really does, either. So at this time, arguing on its basis is exactly equivalent to ILIKEIT/IDONTLIKEIT. It might perhaps be taken to show an unawareness that the matter is disputed, except for the extent of the dispute at these afd discussions. DGG (talk) 22:49, 11 November 2008 (UTC)
 * [[Image:Symbol keep vote.svg|15px]]Keep as article asserts notability through reliable sources should not be deleted. It has to stay per WP:FICT.--63.3.1.1 (talk) 18:33, 14 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment: There are reliable sources, but they are not reliable secondary sources, which is the main problem. All of the sources are somehow related to Lego. -Drilnoth (talk) 18:49, 14 November 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.