Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Scrapper (Transformers)

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 keep. The majority of editors (9 vs. 3) recommended to keep the article or the information therein in some form. There were many claims of notability based on the in-universe significance of the character, and several (new) sources are present. However per Shooterwalker, these sources may not sufficiently satisfy wikipedia policies and guidelines upon a more thorough inspection. Interested editors should continue looking for more appropriate sources to prevent a renomination at a later time. – sgeureka ^t•c 08:52, 22 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Scrapper (Transformers)

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

Non-notable fictional character sourced only to primary sources and thus fails WP:GNG. A merge to a minor characters list is usually appropriate here but none appears to exist. Black Kite (t) (c) 23:54, 3 September 2010 (UTC) Black Kite (t) (c) 23:54, 3 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Major character in a recent notable film. Mathewignash (talk) 00:12, 4 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - notable character within the Transformers franchise, which appeared in the toyline, cartoon, comic books, and film. BOZ (talk) 23:27, 7 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Split the article based along the different series, merge into their respective series character lists, and convert to a disambiguation page. —Farix (t | c) 22:08, 9 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- When dealing with non-notable character articles, it is always preferable to look for a list or to create one to merge the article into, or merge/redirect them to the main article instead of outright deletion. Only in cases where the character is completely incidental should it be deleted. Also, how the page is currently organizes shows the folly of trying to cover more than one character from different series that happen to share the same name. —Farix (t | c) 17:47, 11 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Notability improved - I added a good book citation to the article that should help establish notability. Mathewignash (talk) 22:34, 9 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - No real-world notability asserted for a fictional character. Tarc (talk) 02:21, 10 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - To the closing admin, and so I can stop repeating this rebuttal in AfD after AfD, the "good book citation" by Mathewignash is to Transformers: The Ultimate Guide, is an in-universe reference guide to Transformers, it is not a real-world treatment of the subject area. Tarc (talk) 02:21, 10 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Tarc has it right, the "citations" are all transformers marketing devices. There is no real world notability established for this fictional thing.Bali ultimate (talk) 12:44, 10 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, JForget 22:18, 10 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - It's a notable character. Kurdo777 (talk) 23:29, 10 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep The character seems quite notable, having appeared in numerous works and representations and being covered in numerous sources. Our editing policy is to keep such material. Colonel Warden (talk) 10:00, 11 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
As usual, your interpretation of WP:PRESERVE is a bit defective. If it is notable, prove it. We don't keep articles on presumption. Tarc (talk) 12:42, 11 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Notability improved - I just added a source from an non-licensed guidebook that should be conidered non-primary. Mathewignash (talk) 09:58, 12 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Notable character within the series. Doc Quintana (talk) 16:28, 12 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Despite protests above, a search online brings up no reliable, independent sources for this character. As no notability is indicated, it fails GNG and should be deleted. Skinny87 (talk) 09:55, 14 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - Notable character. Were you even searching properly? --Divebomb (talk) 14:21, 18 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Spartaz ^Humbug! 04:46, 18 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep While only a secondary character, there have been several incarnations of the character across different series, which is a good indication of its notability. --Polaron | Talk 17:43, 20 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
In-universe notability is not relevant though. Real-world, non-primary reliable sources that discuss the subject matter is what is required here. Tarc (talk) 18:03, 20 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Commment- Its been long established that transformers fansites, forums and some books [1] are unreliable sources of information.Dwanyewest (talk) 21:31, 20 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Notable character within the series.--Epeefleche (talk) 07:31, 21 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep a lot of bad sources, like instruction manuals and fansites. But there ARE some third party sources, which tell us some minor facts. How tall he is and a quick description of his appearance. The thing that shows promise is one source that supposedly cites him as one of the top 10 reasons to see the film. In my opinion, it's not enough to WP:verify notability. But it's enough to show potential that this article can continue to be improved. I hope that someone will continue to improve it, and if not I have no prejudice against renominating at a later time. Shooterwalker (talk) 16:27, 21 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.