Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Whitz Wolf


 * 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   merge to List of Zoids.  MBisanz  talk 01:57, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

Whitz Wolf

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

This fictional weapon does not establish notability independent of Zoids through the inclusion of real world information from reliable, third party sources. Most of the information is made up of original research, trivial model details, and unnecessary plot details. There is no current assertion for future improvement of the article, and this is too trivial to require any separate coverage. TTN (talk) 22:46, 8 December 2008 (UTC) 
 * Merge to List of Zoids. There's no original research in sight and you made no effort showing the article is unverifiable rather than unverified by making a reasonable effort to find sources as required by WP:AFD. (those are two different things) - Mgm|(talk) 09:27, 9 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete as unnotable. Eusebeus (talk) 23:36, 10 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  MBisanz  talk 05:01, 13 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep and consider merging elsewhere. As an expansion of the uninformative nomination, there is a discussion on the nominator's talk page,where he announces his intent to nominate for deletion regardless of reasons to merge: "There are currently under twenty articles not currently nominated, so I'd like to just finish up with the nominations over the next two days just to be uniform."  I am not sure it is reasonable to assume good faith here--this very much sounds like a concerted campaign regardless of the individual merits of the articles. DGG (talk) 05:42, 15 December 2008 (UTC).
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, –Juliancolton Happy Holidays 14:27, 18 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete per nom as non-notable.  coccyx bloccyx  (toccyx)  20:47, 18 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete - devoting an entire article to one minor fictional robot among hundreds is pointless and a clear example of undue weight. I do not support a merge because, firstly, there's no appropriate material in this article to salvage (it's all unsourced trivia) and, secondly, the halfway credible Zoids articles that would be targets for the merge are already chock-a-block full of cruft and would be made worse by tipping more cruft into them. Reyk  YO!  23:03, 18 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep and reference better. Merging a full article into a list won't work. --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) (talk) 16:42, 19 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete lacks real world notability and non-trivial coverage from reliable third party publications. JBsupreme (talk) 00:21, 20 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.