Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Airazor

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 Beast Wars characters. The keep arguments are convincing that this subject is worthy of coverage, but not that it is worthy of its own article. Those arguing for a merge make reasonable arguments and it's common practice to merge articles on less notable subjects to lists. If somebody knows of a more appropriate target for the merge, then by all means merge it there instead. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 04:19, 6 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Airazor

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Disputed prod. No evidence of real world notability, very little by way of reliable sources, tagged for weeks as having unclear notability. J Milburn (talk) 20:11, 29 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - fails WP:GNG. I can't see any coverage of this independent reliable sources. Claritas § 20:50, 29 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep The article with a dozen references, covering a major animation character, highly collectable toy, and comic book character who has appeared in fiction from several different major publishers? Of course you keep it. 71.238.126.179 (talk) 21:49, 29 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

— 71.238.126.179 (talk) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.

- None of the sources are reliable. If this character really is so major, there will be reliable sources, and I'm just not seeing any. J Milburn (talk) 22:03, 29 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  - Published toy price guides? Reviews by major TV show writers? Video game review sites? While minor, they do add up to establish notability in a broad variety of non-primary sources. 71.238.126.179 (talk) 22:10, 29 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    - Yeah, but none of those sources give any real discussion of the character beyond a mention. I'm not saying that the character does not exist, I'm saying that he's not notable. Wikipedia is not a collection of every piece of trivia ever. J Milburn (talk) 22:16, 29 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
      - COMMENT Airazor is a SHE. That pretty much shows your knowledge on the subject. Why are you contributing to articles you seem to know nothing about? You wouldn't know a notable Transformer character from a non-notable one. Wouldn't your energy be spent better adding content to articles are knowledgable about instead of deleting stuff at random? Mathewignash (talk) 00:14, 30 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
        Luckily, we don't judge whether a topic is notable based on "knowledgable" editors' opinions, we judge based on reliable sources- something that does not seem to exist here, making this subject non-notable, no matter my expertise. If you want to prove me wrong, be my guest- show some sources. (And if you'd actually take a glance at my userpage, you'd see I've written plenty of recognised articles, and have others currently going through review. If you take a glance at my contributions, you'd see that aside from dealing with this kind of thing today, I have uploaded high quality pictures, worked on a draft in my userspace, participated in review processes and so on. Don't try and paint me as something I'm not.) J Milburn (talk) 00:37, 30 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Character featured in numerous notable animated series and comic books, plus multiple toy lines. Google news only shows one detailed result [1], but how many places out there review shows like this? Just like books, some types of shows get far more coverage than others. Same way with comic books. Dream Focus 22:58, 29 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- If it doesn't get the coverage, it's really not our job to cover it. Wikipedia is not here to write articles about the things other people missed. J Milburn (talk) 22:59, 29 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, a few passing mentions does not notability make. Black Kite (t) (c) 13:55, 30 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: The article under discussion here has been flagged for {{rescue}} by the Article Rescue Squadron, with no explanation as to why this article should be rescued and how that could happen (per ARS instructions). SnottyWong ^confess 15:36, 30 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 16:48, 30 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete No reliable sources, and given the extreme obscurity I'm not expecting any anytime soon. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 23:25, 30 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
~~Centralize discussion~~ and merge and redirect as accordingly decided by Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Transformers centralized discussion. There are so many articles, surely some of them can be lumped. —CodeHydro 13:39, 31 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - I don't see why it's necessary yet to centralize discussion. These AfDs have gotten a good amount of feedback and responses, the admins can decide whether or not to delete based on those discussions. NotARealWord (talk) 16:04, 31 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete- extremely minor and obscure character. No reliable, independent sources. Reyk _YO! 19:14, 31 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Thius is in no way vaugley notable.Slatersteven (talk) 19:55, 31 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep or Merge and redirect to Transformers universe pursuant to the guidelines for elements within a notable fictional work listed at Wikipedia:Notability (fiction). This is a recurring character that has at least two toys modeled after him. No need to destroy the article or its history as the character may become more significant with future Transformer projects. Inniverse (talk) 13:56, 1 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Merge -with List of Beast Wars characters to be more specific, considering that the other "Airazors" are a lot more obscure, while the Beast Wars one was a recurring character on a TV series. By the way, Inniverse, the "Transformers universe" link is about stuff specifically called "Transformers: Universe" not "the fictional universe of Transformers". NotARealWord (talk) 14:16, 1 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep The actual choice is between merge and keep;given that it's already about a group of characters, keep would seem the obvious choice here. for a separate article. Deletion is certainly inappropriate, and should not have been suggested. DGG ( talk ) 02:49, 2 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- A group of completely non-notable characters, linked only by name... Deletion is absolutely appropriate, we do not need this content just dumped somewhere else... J Milburn (talk) 10:46, 2 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete WP:Notability (fiction) has not achieved consensus, whereas WP:N represents community best practices as a guideline. No sources exist that can sufficiently WP:verify notability of this topic as a toy or as a television character. Shooterwalker (talk) 21:47, 2 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Its been shown time and time again the so called "sources" on this and many other Transformers articles are unreliable :See "Reliable sources for Transformers" Dwanyewest (talk) 01:54, 5 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: per Dgg - Ret.Prof (talk) 17:05, 5 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as this article is already about four separate characters of the same name. In a sense, it has already been merged so further merging could only cause confusion as distinctions are often lost when information is condensed in merges. Moreover, I might add that the simple fact that the name has been conserved across four different series clearly demonstrates the importance of the character to Transformers. As per DGG, this nomination seems inappropriate. —CodeHydro 17:44, 5 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- They're four different characters. The fact that four different characters share a name doesn't mean we're justified in having an article about them (regardless of sourcing and real-world notability). If the article was in even a close to decent state, this kind of argument may carry some weight, but it simply isn't... J Milburn (talk) 18:44, 5 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  - I'm not sure if "four different characters" is accurate. The article itself has the big time error as listing the Airazor of Transformers: Timelines separately from the Beast Wars character. They're directly the same character. NotARealWord (talk) 21:15, 5 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

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.