Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Zeta Prime


 * 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) 16:52, 13 September 2010 (UTC)

Zeta Prime

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

Not really that important a character. Nothing to indicate that it has real-world notability. Delete NotARealWord (talk) 12:21, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

Redirect Only has importance within the franchise. So all information should be redirected to relavant character lists. Originaly I had redirected to the War for Cybertron article. Sarujo (talk) 13:56, 7 September 2010 (UTC) Comment- I'm not sure about rediercting to War for Cybertron. Considering: NotARealWord (talk) 14:44, 8 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 18:51, 7 September 2010 (UTC)
 * 1) The name "Zeta Prime" was not made up for the game.
 * 2) Hasbro's official name for the War for Cybertron character might be Sentinel Zeta Prime. (see here)
 * Other Wikis and Wikias are not reliable sources. Either way, the character is not notable. Sarujo (talk) 15:41, 8 September 2010 (UTC)
 * I still think merging (if at all) should be done with something else. NotARealWord (talk) 15:51, 8 September 2010 (UTC)
 * That just it. If a character has mutiple incarnations, then all incarnations need to be place in the appropriate character lists. The current Zeta in War For Cybertron, The original in the original in the original character list. See? Sarujo (talk) 15:58, 8 September 2010 (UTC)
 * So... merge with this? NotARealWord (talk) 16:02, 8 September 2010 (UTC)

I'm against deletion or merging, there are already so many obscure comic book characters and characters from other franchises in wikipedia. Is it really going to hurt the quality of wikipedia to leave this article? My magic eight ball says "Not likely".M4bwav (talk) 16:12, 8 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Please read Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions. NotARealWord (talk) 17:18, 8 September 2010 (UTC)


 * In truth, that article should be tagged too. There no nobility it anywhere to show that the title of Prime has extended past the confines of the franchise. Sarujo (talk) 17:25, 8 September 2010 (UTC)


 * Delete - Zero notability, "sourcing" is to a blog and a discussion forum. Tarc (talk) 17:51, 8 September 2010 (UTC)


 * Merge into a G1 characters as a comic only character. —Farix (t &#124; c) 00:12, 10 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment' - But he's NOT a comic-only character. The guy from War for Cybertron is kinda, him, and he was mentioned in The Allspark Almanac Volume II, which retconned him into a character from the original cartoon. But really he's still not notable . NotARealWord (talk) 16:25, 10 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment - It was my understanding that he first appeared in the animated series. To be precise, the episode Five Faces of Darkness. Sarujo (talk) 22:00, 10 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Yeah, via a hidden retcon. NotARealWord (talk) 22:05, 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) 18:11, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
 * I earlier tagged this with a notability issue tag, but User:Mathewignash had it removed. Which is why I decided to niminate this article for deletion. Even if it doesn't get deleted, at least I can make it clear that the subject doesn't deserve it's own article and Mathewignash can't stop that. I'm guessing it's not the kind of disruptive act mentioned here, since it's clear that Zeta Prime isn't actually worthy of an article. NotARealWord (talk) 20:22, 11 September 2010 (UTC)


 * Delete, no reliable sources cited, absolutely no evidence of real-world notability. J Milburn (talk) 15:37, 11 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.