Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Zatch Bell! characters


 * 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 of the debate was keep. Someone else can do the cleanup work. Lazily yours, Sjakkalle (Check!)  08:37, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

Zatch Bell! characters
I'm a very big fan of this show, and while I appreciate the content of this page, I have to admit it's rather excessive and borders on listcruft. The information here can be found in various Zatch Bell websites. I feel it would better serve Wikipedia to only have articles on the characters that play a large part in the storyline (Zatch Bell, Kiyo Takamine, Megumi Oumi, Tia, Parco Folgore, Kanchomé, etc.). Danny Lilithborne 09:00, 4 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep if rewritten. Would be a shame to go this to waste. A decent solution would be to split minor chars in another article or something like that, and cleanup a bit the main part. :)) -- Grafikm_fr   (AutoGRAF)  10:08, 4 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep and rewrite. ˑˑˑ 日 本 穣 Talk to Nihonjo  ε  18:59, 4 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Japan-related deletions.   -- ˑˑˑ 日 本 穣  Talk to Nihonjo  ε  18:59, 4 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete. I agree with the nomination.  It's not worth rewriting, and there's nobody here volunteering for the job, anyway. Brian G. Crawford 20:52, 4 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep. I pretty much made this page what it is today and the last thing I want to see is it going down the tubes. EO
 * Keep and rewrite. Admittedly I know nothing about the show, so I have no idea what characters should be split off or even removed, but I'll leave that to someone who knows better. Certainly no reason to delete the entire article, though. BryanG 04:16, 5 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment I would offer to rewrite, but I am currently very early in the anime (episode 13), and have not even read the manga. I would love to collaborate with someone who has more familiarity, though. Danny Lilithborne 04:19, 5 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Amazing that somebody would actually bother to write all this stuff. It's of absolutely no interest to me whatever, and I suspect that it's of minimal significance to anything or anyone other than fans (who I imagine already have entire websites devoted to it); but I fear that the alternative is for the obsessive author(s) to create an article on each of these characters. If WP is going to have all this fancruft, then at least keep it in a single article. Thus: unenthusiastic keep. -- Hoary 12:14, 5 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Amazing that somebody would actually bother to write all this stuff. It's of absolutely no interest to me whatever, and I suspect that it's of minimal significance to anything or anyone other than fans (who I imagine already have entire websites devoted to it); but I fear that the alternative is for the obsessive author(s) to create an article on each of these characters. If WP is going to have all this fancruft, then at least keep it in a single article. Thus: unenthusiastic keep. -- Hoary 12:14, 5 May 2006 (UTC)


 * Keep Well, that was drawn out, Ho. Do we have to read your comment to get your vote? Weird stuff, Ho. Don't make me call A pimp named slickback.


 * Anyway, It's funny how people love to stuff things are irrelavent and "fancruft". "It's only of interests to trhe fans!~ neee!" Yeah...that's the thing. Last time I checked, Wikipedia isn't about that sort of distrimination. It actually tries to avoid such things. If we only list iconic and "attractive" fiction, stuff the average joe or jane wants to know about, I think we'd be left with..."Batman, Spiderman and Superman". Now, I don't know about anyone else, but that'd look liked a damned biased and uninformation encyclopedia to me.


 * However, getting beyond policies and politics for a minute, this is...clearly...not up to Wikipedia's standards. Was a "Deletion request" in order? No, sir! Perhaps a bit of tagging, or more aggressive arguing for a split in the talk page. Feh. No matter. I suppose I support a Rewrite or Split as well since that's what'll happen. Ace Class Shadow 19:23, 5 May 2006 (UTC)


 * We have read your comment to get your vote? I haven't a clue. Don't make me call a "pimp named slickback". Right, the stuff [warning: loathsome cookies etc.] sounds vile; I'll have a bottle of Orval instead. If we only list iconic and "attractive" fiction, stuff the average joe or jane wants to know about, I think we'd be left with..."Batman, Spiderman and Superman". Uh, hello? I thought this was 2006, not 1956. And the question might be not of what Joejane already knows a lot about, but of what heorshe might be likely to have some interest in. I think that would include such things as Get Your War On, Maus, and Palestine. -- Hoary 23:40, 5 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Note: ACS has already voted. Comment: I was basically saying that Ho(ary) should list his vote up top, and that what people want to know about is SUBJECTIVE. Wikipedia's supposed to have information about everything, right? Well, if we delete this, I doubt we'll be helping WP toward that noble goal. I've never heard of "Get your war on", but—Someone sure knows how to miscapitalize—I doubt more than...feh...100,000 people have. Subjectivity, you see. Anyway, to that end, I was simply downing on this debate as a whole. It's pointless. Slap on some Tags/Templates, Discuss the need for change/overhaul on the talk page, and/or do whatever one can justify on their own. This...is a last resort being used far too lightly. BTW, my mention of "A pimp named slickpack" was a Boondocks reference. A final joke coupled with my startening of your name to "Ho". All in good fun, my friend. ACS (Wikipedian) 00:08, 6 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Edit, but Keep One thing that I've noticed about Wiki is that there are certain groups that seem to create articles about every little thing in their universe from the most important characters with the longest history to the most minor of minor characters. Even though there are websites that go even further, some people want to make the Wiki the be-all and end-all of the information.  And while there are many who would say otherwise, I do believe that it is important to have a list of the Mamono in ZB.  Each of these characters, some of whom have merely a couple chapters devoted to them, is important to the series one way or another.  While I'm not the one that can figure out how to edit this list down (since a lot can be edited instantly based on the author), maybe the key would be to at least have a list of Mamono, a little on each (whether or not it includes the spells), and then direct them to a better source such as the link at the bottom. — Preceding unsigned comment added by StrangerAtaru (talk • contribs)


 * Note: ACS has already voted, so the following is merely a Comment: WTF, Stranger?! Surely there was another way for you to added your vote than the once which you ultimately chose. ACS 20:03, 5 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep, most anime series have a list of characters. I have seen worse, like Characters of Naruto. I will see if I can get some free time to work on this article. -- ReyBrujo 22:49, 5 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep, Trim, rewrite, DO NOT split, It needs to be converted into prose rather than its current list form. See the character whose main articles are currently listed as good: Characters_of_Planetes List_of_Final_Fantasy_VIII_characters. --Kunzite 17:57, 8 May 2006 (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.