Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Other Rangers and Ranger-like allies: Difference between revisions

< Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion Browse history interactively ← Previous editContent deleted Content addedVisual WikitextInline

Revision as of 15:38, 3 March 2008 editAndros 1337 (talk \| contribs)Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers18,540 edits keep← Previous edit		Latest revision as of 13:50, 8 February 2023 edit undoMalnadachBot (talk \| contribs)11,637,095 editsm Fixed Lint errors. (Task 12)Tag: AWB
(13 intermediate revisions by 9 users not shown)
Line 1:		Line 1:
			<div class="boilerplate metadata afd vfd xfd-closed" style="background-color: #F3F9FF; margin: 2em 0 0 0; padding: 0 10px 0 10px; border: 1px solid #AAAAAA;">
⚫	===]===
			:''The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a ]). No further edits should be made to this page.''
	{{REMOVE THIS TEMPLATE WHEN CLOSING THIS AfD\|F}}
			<!--Template:Afd top

			Note: If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to re-nominate an article for deletion, you must manually edit the AfD nomination links in order to create a new discussion page using the name format of ]. When you create the new discussion page, please provide a link to this old discussion in your nomination. -->

			The result was '''keep'''. ] ] 22:26, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
		⚫	===]===
	:{{la\|Other Rangers and Ranger-like allies}} (<span class="plainlinks">]}}&action=delete}} delete]</span>) – <includeonly>(])</includeonly><noinclude>(])</noinclude>		:{{la\|Other Rangers and Ranger-like allies}} (<span class="plainlinks">]}}&action=delete}} delete]</span>) – <includeonly>(])</includeonly><noinclude>(])</noinclude>
	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?. ] (]) 03:24, 3 March 2008 (UTC)		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?. ] (]) 03:24, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

	*'''Delete''' Looks like a fannish original research festival to me. ] (]) 04:39, 3 March 2008 (UTC)		*'''Delete''' Looks like a fannish original research festival to me. ] (]) 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.—] (]) 05:27, 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.—] (]) 05:27, 3 March 2008 (UTC)
	*'''Keep''': If there's an issue with naming, fix it. No need to delete. --] (]) 05:58, 3 March 2008 (UTC)		*'''Keep''': If there's an issue with naming, fix it. No need to delete. --] (]) 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. ] (]) 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)
			*'''Delete or Merge''', has no sources outside of the Power Rangers shows. The claim by ] that ''none of it is original research'', and that the Power Rangers are ''based in reality'', shows how deeply fictional topics dye some people's wool, as it were. ] (]) 20:58, 3 March 2008 (UTC)
			**That is in no way what I meant. What I meant is that the only thing that has not been written about or appeared in the fictional subject itself is the title of the page. If the page's title was "Other Power Rangers and allies to the Power Rangers" then that would be less of an "OR" title. There is no where that this information can really be merged to. Nothing needs to be deleted here. What Mythdon wants is a different name which is not decided through AFD.—] (]) 22:32, 3 March 2008 (UTC)
			*'''Keep''' - I believe the page is notable enough for its own article. True, it may be considered a small fork of the main Power Rangers article, but there is simply too much content to be put in the one page so it makes sense to split this topic off. ] 22:47, 3 March 2008 (UTC)
			*<small>'''Note''': This debate has been included in the ]. </small><small>—] (]) 03:54, 5 March 2008 (UTC)</small>
			*<small>'''Note''': This debate has been included in the ]. </small><small>—] (]) 03:54, 5 March 2008 (UTC)</small>
			*'''Keep and rename''' or '''merge''' into ]. --] (]) 04:01, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

			:''The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a ]). No further edits should be made to this page.'' <!--Template:Afd bottom--></div>

Latest revision as of 13:50, 8 February 2023

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. faithless () 22:26, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

Other Rangers and Ranger-like allies

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)
Delete or Merge, has no sources outside of the Power Rangers shows. The claim by User:Ryulong that none of it is original research, and that the Power Rangers are based in reality, shows how deeply fictional topics dye some people's wool, as it were. Paddy Simcox (talk) 20:58, 3 March 2008 (UTC)
- That is in no way what I meant. What I meant is that the only thing that has not been written about or appeared in the fictional subject itself is the title of the page. If the page's title was "Other Power Rangers and allies to the Power Rangers" then that would be less of an "OR" title. There is no where that this information can really be merged to. Nothing needs to be deleted here. What Mythdon wants is a different name which is not decided through AFD.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 22:32, 3 March 2008 (UTC)
Keep - I believe the page is notable enough for its own article. True, it may be considered a small fork of the main Power Rangers article, but there is simply too much content to be put in the one page so it makes sense to split this topic off. Ryan Postlethwaite 22:47, 3 March 2008 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fictional characters-related deletion discussions. —Pixelface (talk) 03:54, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. —Pixelface (talk) 03:54, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
Keep and rename or merge into List of Power Rangers characters. --Pixelface (talk) 04:01, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

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.