Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/AkaRed

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 — the arguments for deletion here held that this article is not only unsourced, and thus fails notability guidelines, but that it cannot be sourced to reliable sources. Arguments for keep fail to address this in any substantial way — chiefly, by providing sources. Naturally, this is not prejudice to a properly sourced article being written on this subject. --Haemo 01:18, 9 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

AkaRed

This article regarding a fictional character shows no real world context, cannot be cited to meet the secondary sources requirement of WP:FICT, and the character is generally not notable outside of its own fictional universe Pilotbob 03:53, 3 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: Deleting an article is not the first response to bad content. Fix it first. All of this seems to be in response to the keep of another article in the same series. We do not delete articles because of WP:NOT. We fix them.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 04:06, 3 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
This article cannot meet WP:NOT. I could not find coverage of this subject in any reliable secondary source so it does not meet WP:FICT. If this article is rewritten, it still will not policy guidelines. Since reliable secondary sources do not exist, no amount of rewriting can make a difference. Explain how this article can be revised without still violating WP:NOT, WP:N, and WP:RS. I have nominated these articles because I believe fixing them is impossible Pilotbob 04:26, 3 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
There are a handful of websites that I could find tonight that would serve as secondary sources, and I could find the primary sources as well. This article could feasibly be merged into its series' article, but not outright deleted.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 04:28, 3 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
delete per protest vote above. ^Law/_Disorder 04:29, 3 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
What?—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 04:37, 3 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
your vote ignored the reasoning in the deletion and was basically copy and pasted in multiple deletion debates. ^Law/_Disorder 04:41, 3 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
That's because all of the deletion rationales were a copy and paste in those same debates. Afterwards, I reviewed and made the secondary replies, such as merge here, delete at two others, and merge at a third. Out of all of the pages listed for deletion in the purview of the WikiProject I started.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 04:44, 3 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fictional characters-related deletions. -- Pilotbob 12:29, 3 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:NOT#PLOT. This is just a summary of the character's role in the plot with no real-world context or analysis. It's doubtful reliable secondary sources exist to fix that problem or to establish notability per WP:FICT. Without such sources, this article cannot be "fixed". Doctorfluffy 19:04, 3 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Note - user indefinitely blocked as disruptive sockpuppet. — xDanielx ^T/_C 22:33, 9 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Keep notable--Zingostar 21:38, 4 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Merge: This information is unworthy of being kept on a single page and needs to be Trimmed down. -Adv193 22:12, 4 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete and do not merge as article has no primary or secondary sources. --Gavin Collins 08:25, 6 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- But that does not mean that they cannot be found for the inclusion in the article to which it could be merged to.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 21:52, 6 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete unless secondary sources found.--Doc^g 23:20, 6 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: That's right, we must delete this trivial article that's only useful to a few thousand people in order to save electrons. Remember, save those electrons, they're more important than you think. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 134.139.148.100 (talk) 17:57, 8 November 2007 (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.