Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/ Luna (Yu-Gi-Oh! 5D's)


 * 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 Yu-Gi-Oh! 5D's characters.   A rbitrarily 0   ( talk ) 14:34, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

Luna (Yu-Gi-Oh! 5D's)

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

Unreferenced fan cruft about a fictional character. Contains zero encyclopedic real world information other than pure in depth in universe which has no meaning to the average reader, article not strong enough to justify an article in its own right and lacks context. Google search revealed no significant coverage of this character. I'd recommend deleting this and redirecting and producing a referenced summary in a List of charatcers article instead. ‡ Himalayan ‡ ΨMonastery 14:20, 10 February 2010 (UTC) That would be easiest. If there is widespread project support by the most active members such as yourself I'd think that rather than loads of AFDs we could draw up a list of fictional anime/manga character articles that most believe are not strong enough to sustain a seperate article and redirect to a summarised list. Rather than it being done over night. I'd be happy to help you with that but the best thing would be to come to consensus with the project on the main talk page and root out all of the articles that should be redirected. I don;t expect it to be done straigt away, it may take weeks or months but I think it would be a good thing to draw up lists of similar articles which need redirecting and then simply do it, save time and possible and avoidable conflict I think....I have seen some pretty good articles on fictional charatcers though which have enough out of universe info and sources to make in encyclopedic in its own right. It may not always be easy deciding what to merge thats the problem we now face. ‡ Himalayan ‡ ΨMonastery 14:51, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Anime and manga-related deletion discussions.  -- —Farix (t &#124; c) 14:36, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Merge or Redirect to List of Yu-Gi-Oh! 5D's characters. This should be a nobrainer. —Farix (t &#124; c) 14:37, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
 * You clearly have no clue as to what you are talking about, nor about my, or any other editor at WP:ANIME activities on Wikipedia. So you can put a leash back on your attack dog. Nor can you go around ordering other editors to do certain work when they already have other projects on their hands. —Farix (t &#124; c) 14:57, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Right then, have it your way. I'll AFD every single article like this which clearly deserves to be instantly deleted until you decide to stop attacking me and we can come to a way of redirecting the bunch of other articles like this without this aggression from you. My mesagae above was perfectly level headed and was a proposal to discuss it rationally without having to open an AFD for each one, but once again your response it awful. I DO know what I'm talking about and articles like this should be deleted and merged into a summarised list.  ‡ Himalayan ‡  ΨMonastery 15:43, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

Or might it be that they are just a pile of s**t and should be instantly deleted? ‡ Himalayan ‡ ΨMonastery 15:46, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
 * The primary method of dealing with character articles should always be to tag it for merging or merge/redirect it there and then to whatever parent list there is (it depends on the article in question). It's more or less how we do things already, but as pointed out previously we don't have the manpower to do it in the speed you believe is required. There is no need to afd things like this unless it becomes controversial. Given the previous discussions you have raised and participated in, I would suggest you stop afd'ing articles and dumping the work on others. Either help, or leave it, otherwise people will start seeing your nominations in bad faithDandy Sephy (talk) 15:01, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Actually I do think that these nominations are WP:POINTy attempts to antagonize the anime project over the failure of those two biography AfDs. —Farix (t &#124; c) 15:05, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
 * That's excruciating point, unless you know the fictional work you can't be certain. If an editor with a good standing comes and i say "i know this fictional work, the best is delete and i rewrite from scratch" i'm sure this discussion would be different. Everyone is permitted to nuke fictional article contents as long as they know the fictional work enough and are ready to assume the post-nuking technical support. --KrebMarkt 16:19, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

No I'm not certain, but I was pretty certain these recent AFDs are legitimate. But this is why I want your "expertise" to make such judgments rather than myself and how it looks to the casual eye and to distinguish what is salvagable and what is not. See the anime project talk page. You call the shots on what is soot then not me. ‡ Himalayan ‡ ΨMonastery 16:22, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Merge & Redirect Nothing that assert its own notability aside from the main work. Unfortunately it will have to get in the queue of anime/manga articles to be merged which is right now well above the 800 articles Category:Anime and manga articles to be merged. Personally i interpret those fiction character AfDs as Article for Discussion bypassing usual merge discussion where there is a risk of walled garden, higher in licenses like Yu-Gi-Oh!. Even if the outcome is near precluded, its enactment may take time. --KrebMarkt 15:34, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Merge to List of Yu-Gi-Oh! 5D's characters. --Gwern (contribs) 21:41 12 February 2010 (GMT)
 * Merge to List of Yu-Gi-Oh! 5D's characters. Edward321 (talk) 03:38, 14 February 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.