| Revision as of 15:38, 3 March 2008 editAndros 1337 (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers18,540 edits keep← Previous edit | Revision as of 17:07, 3 March 2008 edit undoUtgard Loki (talk | contribs)2,260 edits →Other Rangers and Ranger-like alliesNext edit → | ||
| Line 10: | Line 10: | ||
| *'''Keep''': There's no OR here, and the naming issue is a simple one to fix that should never have required an AfD. ] (]) 06:05, 3 March 2008 (UTC) | *'''Keep''': There's no OR here, and the naming issue is a simple one to fix that should never have required an AfD. ] (]) 06:05, 3 March 2008 (UTC) | ||
| *'''Keep''': Since there is no official title for such Rangers, this is the best title that we can come up with. Placing these Rangers within the standard color categories would be original research. ] 15:38, 3 March 2008 (UTC) | *'''Keep''': Since there is no official title for such Rangers, this is the best title that we can come up with. Placing these Rangers within the standard color categories would be original research. ] 15:38, 3 March 2008 (UTC) | ||
| *'''Merge and redirect''' back to ]: The title is "OR," and therefore it is impossible to search. What, then, is the utility of the article, if no one can find it? Isn't this better as a ''section'' in an article that will be read? Isn't it better for the information to put it where it will be seen by those who seek it? It makes no sense as a lost nugget. ] (]) 17:07, 3 March 2008 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 17:07, 3 March 2008
Other Rangers and Ranger-like allies
- Other Rangers and Ranger-like allies (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)
I believe this article should not exist on Misplaced Pages because the terms used in the article witch are "Other Ranger" and "Ranger-like ally" are not official and not used by any site or anywhere i know of. What do you think?. Mythdon (talk) 03:24, 3 March 2008 (UTC)
- Delete Looks like a fannish original research festival to me. Mangoe (talk) 04:39, 3 March 2008 (UTC)
- Keep: None of this is original research. The only aspect that is not based in reality is the name of the page, because there is nothing else that covers all of these characters. This nomination is also malformed because there is no AFD on the page. It is just a notification on the talk page.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 05:27, 3 March 2008 (UTC)
- Keep: If there's an issue with naming, fix it. No need to delete. --MZMcBride (talk) 05:58, 3 March 2008 (UTC)
- Keep: There's no OR here, and the naming issue is a simple one to fix that should never have required an AfD. Arrowned (talk) 06:05, 3 March 2008 (UTC)
- Keep: Since there is no official title for such Rangers, this is the best title that we can come up with. Placing these Rangers within the standard color categories would be original research. ANDROS 15:38, 3 March 2008 (UTC)
- Merge and redirect back to Power Rangers: The title is "OR," and therefore it is impossible to search. What, then, is the utility of the article, if no one can find it? Isn't this better as a section in an article that will be read? Isn't it better for the information to put it where it will be seen by those who seek it? It makes no sense as a lost nugget. Utgard Loki (talk) 17:07, 3 March 2008 (UTC)