Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Command Wolf

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 Zoids. MBisanz ^talk 01:45, 25 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Command Wolf

This fictional weapon does not establish notability independent of Zoids through the inclusion of real world information from reliable, third party sources. Most of the information is made up of original research, trivial model details, and unnecessary plot details. There is no current assertion for future improvement of the article, and this is too trivial to require any separate coverage. TTN (talk) 23:51, 15 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect Mukadderat (talk) 01:25, 19 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:21, 20 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Merge Not notable as independent article subject. ChildofMidnight (talk) 01:31, 20 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Merge and redirect permy comment on Bigasaur. - Mgm|^(talk) 14:45, 20 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Of the articles of Zoids on Wikipedia, this could be one of the more deserving of a keep. The Command Wolf is one of the most reproduced models in the entire Zoids range, with twelve distinct releases across the twenty-five 'lines', and four limited edition releases. The mecha also plays a major role in four of the five anime series', appearing in most episodes as the mecha of a major supporting character (Irvine in Chaotic Century and the first half of Guardian Force, Brad in the first half of Zero, Helmut in Fuzors), and appears throughout all five series' as minor characters.

Having said that, I don't care either way about the fate of this and other Zoids articles, as I contributed to them when I was young and stupid towards the Ways of the Wikipedia. -- saberwyn 01:16, 21 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keep and discuss how to do the merge None of the reasons given are reasons for deletion, only for merging. The best way to clarify this is a straight keep, followed by a discussion about which of these articles should be kept or merged and how much to merge--none of this can appropriately be done article by article here.DGG (talk) 11:46, 21 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Merge and/or redirect to Zoids. (And update List of Zoids.) Merging is a completely acceptable outcome for an AFD discussion, and saying we can't agree on a merge here would be to impose excess bureaucracy, which Wikipedia is not. To quote our anti-bureaucracy policy (albeit with a touch of irony), it's obvious that we can resolve this AFD "through consensus-based discussion, rather than through tightly sticking to rules and procedures". 64.231.195.170 (talk) 22:36, 23 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Just because merging is an acceptable outcome for an AFD discussion does not mean that is acceptable to nominate something for AFD that should be merged. AFD is for things that need to be deleted, not for things that can reasonably be merged or redirected to more appropriate articles. WP:BEFORE says to consider these things before nominating, not after. Individually nominating dozens of similar articles with the same boilerplate rationale is excess bureaucracy, and it's obvious that most of the AFD's that are brought by the nominator could be resolved through the normal procedures outlined at WP:MERGE, instead of wasting the time of AFD participants and administrators for something that could be resolved "through consensus-based discussion, rather than through tightly sticking to rules and procedures" without needing an administrator to hit the delete button. It is far easier to apply a {{mergeto}} tag to an article than to nominate for deletion, the nominator could have added a merge tag to each of these Zoids articles and pointed them to a single discussion on Talk:List of Zoids, for example, to determine which of these articles should be merged and which (if any) should be kept as separate articles. It is likely that no one would have objected to a reasonable merge of these articles. It seems clear for the dozens of prior "discussions" (what little discussion there is) that the consensus for the majority of these articles is to merge and/or redirect, and I can't for the life of me figure out any reason other than obsessive-compulsiveness to continue to bring these to AFD after such consensus has already repeatedly been determined. DHowell (talk) 07:24, 24 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Merge and/or redirect, as usual, and slap the nominator with a school of trouts until he figures out that he can use merge tags, talk-page discussion, and bold, revert, discuss (with emphasis on the "discuss" part after a "revert" happens) to accomplish his goals without wasting the time of AFD participants and administrators. DHowell (talk) 07:24, 24 December 2008 (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.