Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tripredacus


 * 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   Courcelles 09:52, 14 September 2010 (UTC) delete. Courcelles 09:52, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

Tripredacus

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

Non-notable fictional character(s) that didn't really get much screentime. Delete. NotARealWord (talk) 16:52, 7 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 17:16, 7 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete. No reliable sources cited, no evidence of real-world notability. J Milburn (talk) 18:55, 7 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep - Notable character article that just needs work. At the rate these deletionists are nominating articles, how can they expect work to be done on them! Keep and start nominating them at a sane pace. Mathewignash (talk) 21:06, 7 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment- How can Tripredacus be notable? He/They didn't even get much screen time. NotARealWord (talk) 15:53, 8 September 2010 (UTC)


 * Merge into List of Beast Wars characters. Tripredacus Council already redirects to this article and the article is about the Tripredacus Council. —Farix (t &#124; c) 00:19, 10 September 2010 (UTC)**When dealing with non-notable character articles, it is always preferable to look for a list or to create one to merge the article into, or merge/redirect them to the main article instead of outright deletion and is in keeping with the WP:PRESERVE policy. Only in cases where the character is completely incidental should it be deleted. —Farix (t &#124; c) 18:16, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete - No real-world notability asserted for a fictional character. Tarc (talk) 02:06, 10 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Notability -I just added a non-primary book source to the article. Mathewignash (talk) 12:54, 12 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment - That book is a toy guide. If it doesn't say much about the subject of the article (Tripredacus), then it doesn't establish notability.Bali ultimate's argument on Articles for deletion/Energon (power source) is about that kinda source that doesn't give much coverage to the subject. NotARealWord (talk) 19:49, 12 September 2010 (UTC)


 * Delete - No reliable sources used in article, and can't find any in searches online. Fails GNG and notability - should remain on TFWiki. Skinny87 (talk) 09:48, 14 September 2010 (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.