Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kremling

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 redirect to List of Donkey Kong characters. Mgm|^(talk) 12:21, 6 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Kremling

Covers a series of enemies of no notability, of which only one seems to have any real world importance at all. Just too limited in scope and references are non-existent to expand it much beyond where it is now. Kung Fu Man (talk) 00:39, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of video game related deletion discussions. MrKIA11 (talk) 00:48, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy delete - unencyclopedically written, non-notable, unreferenced. The long list, and what it purports to show, is particularly entertaining, however! ╟─Treasury Tag►contribs─╢ 10:37, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Can you site a specific speedy deletion critera that this would fall under? The reason is while the reason you cite a good arguments for deleting an article none of them as far as I can tell are covered by the speedy deletion criteria. --70.24.180.231 (talk) 19:57, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, when I say "speedy delete", I don't mean this, it's just a common phrase used at AfD to indicate that this seems to be a clear-cut case and should be dealt with quickly! Pardon me for being ambiguous!! ╟─Treasury Tag►contribs─╢ 21:01, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, MBisanz ^talk 00:09, 6 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to List of Donkey Kong characters as a plausible search term. MuZemike 01:31, 6 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Delete though nothing a good cleanup and a bit of expansion couldn't fix. Jenuk1985 | Talk 10:45, 6 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect. I agree with MuZemike (again); plausible search terms shouldn't be redlinks.—S Marshall ^Talk/_Cont 11:43, 6 March 2009 (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.