Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion/Makuta

Closing administrator's decision rationale
If you choose to add comments to this page, please do so in a new section below, do not inturrupt my comments here.

Raw count analysis

 * Delete
 * 1) Doctorfluffy
 * 2) Ridernyc (5 edits)
 * 3) EliasAlucard (2 edits)
 * 4) Lankiveil
 * 5) Pharmboy (2 edits)
 * 6) JJL (2 edits)


 * Keep
 * 1) Hobit
 * 2) 68.4.242.128 (2 edits)
 * 3) karaku
 * 4) Hal peridol
 * 5) Colonel Warden (2 edits)
 * 6) Illustrious One (2 edits)


 * Non-participatory
 * 1) SineBot - signing unsigned comments
 * 2) Pb30 - delsort
 * 3) Yamamoto Ichiro - relisted

Valid keep arguments

 * non-trivial news article source provided

Discounted keep arguments

 * WP:ILIKEIT
 * WP:OSE
 * WP:ALLORNOTHING
 * important in it's fictional universe
 * primary sources are verified to be true
 * author of the fictional work verified facts
 * WP:INTERESTING
 * edit function disabled on article
 * temporary database lock only due to server lag
 * inherits notability from books/games it is in
 * toy proves notability
 * most significant character in this series
 * size of article justifies keep

Valid Delete Arguments

 * Original research
 * non-notable
 * No real world context
 * only primary sources
 * sources added only prove notability of the fictional work, not this character in a real-world context
 * fails WP:FICTION
 * non-encyclopedic

Summary
Although a close split of the raw !vote count, most of the keep arguments were extraordinarily weak. In determining rough consensus, the strength of argument of each comment is considered, and proper weighting applied, which includes ignoring some recommendations altogether. There were sufficient delete !votes, with arguments based solidly in policy, guideline, and precedent to call this one as delete. JERRY talk contribs 00:37, 3 February 2008 (UTC)