| Revision as of 03:29, 8 March 2009 editMBisanz (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users126,668 edits Closing debate, result was redirect to Robotech Wars ← Previous edit | Revision as of 04:54, 29 January 2022 edit undoMalnadachBot (talk | contribs)11,637,095 editsm Fixed misnested tags and reduced Lint errors. (Task 12)Tag: AWBNext edit → | ||
| Line 21: | Line 21: | ||
| :*'''Comment''' ] trumps ]. --''']''' (]) 23:22, 3 March 2009 (UTC) | :*'''Comment''' ] trumps ]. --''']''' (]) 23:22, 3 March 2009 (UTC) | ||
| *'''Delete''' Fails ] and ]. ] (]) 05:43, 4 March 2009 (UTC) | *'''Delete''' Fails ] and ]. ] (]) 05:43, 4 March 2009 (UTC) | ||
| *'''Keep''' ] trumps ]. If you don't like reading about this key aspects of an immensely popular and influential work, then aren't likely to ever find the article to begin with, and can simply ignore it. There is no reason to delete it. It does not help the wikipedia at all to destroy articles like this. ]''' 03:22, 5 March 2009 (UTC) | *'''Keep''' ] trumps ]. If you don't like reading about this key aspects of an immensely popular and influential work, then aren't likely to ever find the article to begin with, and can simply ignore it. There is no reason to delete it. It does not help the wikipedia at all to destroy articles like this. ] 03:22, 5 March 2009 (UTC) | ||
| :*You can only curse those who literaly screw up the whole thing. This article has the wrong name, wrong focus, wrong manual of style, wrong tone. Its lacks neutrality as the in-universe point of view precludes it. It can't be salvaged unless you rewrite it from the bottom hence better to start again from a clean slate. The best would be to start it as a beffed up List of episodes so we could do it the right way. --] 07:57, 5 March 2009 (UTC) | :*You can only curse those who literaly screw up the whole thing. This article has the wrong name, wrong focus, wrong manual of style, wrong tone. Its lacks neutrality as the in-universe point of view precludes it. It can't be salvaged unless you rewrite it from the bottom hence better to start again from a clean slate. The best would be to start it as a beffed up List of episodes so we could do it the right way. --] 07:57, 5 March 2009 (UTC) | ||
| *'''Delete'''. Entirely plot summary and in-universe information for a non-notable fictional topic which has not received substantial in reliable secondary sources. ] <small>(])</small> 03:50, 5 March 2009 (UTC) | *'''Delete'''. Entirely plot summary and in-universe information for a non-notable fictional topic which has not received substantial in reliable secondary sources. ] <small>(])</small> 03:50, 5 March 2009 (UTC) | ||
| Line 35: | Line 35: | ||
| **] | **] | ||
| :There seems to have been no effort to actually discuss merging usable content which may be the best solution. Looking at each AfD separately it wasn't clear they were related. Merging seems to make sense. ] 18:45, 7 March 2009 (UTC) | :There seems to have been no effort to actually discuss merging usable content which may be the best solution. Looking at each AfD separately it wasn't clear they were related. Merging seems to make sense. ] 18:45, 7 March 2009 (UTC) | ||
| ::Can you possibly fit even 10% of all of that into one article? I don't see how a merger would be possible. ]''' 19:33, 7 March 2009 (UTC) | ::Can you possibly fit even 10% of all of that into one article? I don't see how a merger would be possible. ] 19:33, 7 March 2009 (UTC) | ||
| :::Ideally it would be done judiciously - as these five related subpages are all heading for deletion we would be losing ''all'' of it. Seems to me there's likely some helpful content there. ] 00:48, 8 March 2009 (UTC) | :::Ideally it would be done judiciously - as these five related subpages are all heading for deletion we would be losing ''all'' of it. Seems to me there's likely some helpful content there. ] 00:48, 8 March 2009 (UTC) | ||
Revision as of 04:54, 29 January 2022
- 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 Robotech Wars . Content can still be transwikied. MBisanz 03:29, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
First Robotech War
- First Robotech War (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)
Fails WP: Fiction and WP: Notability. Article can be transwikied to here and here. SkyWalker (talk) 04:16, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Anime and manga-related deletion discussions. —— sephiroth bcr 04:28, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
- Delete – pretty blatant failure of WP:NOT#PLOT. No notability asserted either through any sources independent of the topic. — sephiroth bcr 04:28, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
- Delete - Excessive and crufty plot summary sourced entirely from primary sources. Spectacularly fails our requirements for reliable sources and notability. Reyk YO! 05:34, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
- Delete Too in-universe to be of any use. They overdid themselves on that one. --KrebMarkt 05:37, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
- Transwiki to suggested locations, and redirect to Robotech Wars 76.66.193.90 (talk) 06:01, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
- Comment this article is a plot summary of season one of Robotech 76.66.193.90 (talk) 06:01, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
- Transwiki to the Robotech Wikia and then delete. One of the more gross violations of WP:NOT#PLOT. The article also has issues with WP:V and WP:NOR. --Farix (Talk) 21:31, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
- Transwiki as suggested. --Kraftlos (Talk | Contrib) 08:58, 6 March 2009 (UTC)
- Keep This article is an accurate summary of the First Robotech Saga television series. Robotech was one of the earliest and most important extrapolation of Japanese anime to a western audience. The article is sourced from the television series as well as the Robotech Novels. It should not be deleted. Alternatively, it could be merged with the Robotech Wars article.(Hyperionsteel (talk) 23:11, 3 March 2009 (UTC))
- Comment WP:NOT trumps WP:ILIKEIT. --Farix (Talk) 23:22, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
- Delete Fails Notability and WP:FICTION. Edison (talk) 05:43, 4 March 2009 (UTC)
- Keep WP:SENSE trumps wikilawyering. If you don't like reading about this key aspects of an immensely popular and influential work, then aren't likely to ever find the article to begin with, and can simply ignore it. There is no reason to delete it. It does not help the wikipedia at all to destroy articles like this. Dream Focus 03:22, 5 March 2009 (UTC)
- You can only curse those who literaly screw up the whole thing. This article has the wrong name, wrong focus, wrong manual of style, wrong tone. Its lacks neutrality as the in-universe point of view precludes it. It can't be salvaged unless you rewrite it from the bottom hence better to start again from a clean slate. The best would be to start it as a beffed up List of episodes so we could do it the right way. --KrebMarkt 07:57, 5 March 2009 (UTC)
- Delete. Entirely plot summary and in-universe information for a non-notable fictional topic which has not received substantial in reliable secondary sources. Doctorfluffy (robe and wizard hat) 03:50, 5 March 2009 (UTC)
- Delete Cruft per the usual reasons elucidated by the above dels. Jack Merridew 07:52, 5 March 2009 (UTC)
- Delete as in-world content having no real-world notability. Stifle (talk) 19:15, 6 March 2009 (UTC)
- Delete marginally referenced in-universe plot summary for non-notable fictional event. --EEMIV (talk) 15:23, 7 March 2009 (UTC)
- Merge all to Robotech Wars, apparently the parent with all these separately sent to AFD;
- There seems to have been no effort to actually discuss merging usable content which may be the best solution. Looking at each AfD separately it wasn't clear they were related. Merging seems to make sense. -- Banjeboi 18:45, 7 March 2009 (UTC)
- Can you possibly fit even 10% of all of that into one article? I don't see how a merger would be possible. Dream Focus 19:33, 7 March 2009 (UTC)
- Ideally it would be done judiciously - as these five related subpages are all heading for deletion we would be losing all of it. Seems to me there's likely some helpful content there. -- Banjeboi 00:48, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
- Can you possibly fit even 10% of all of that into one article? I don't see how a merger would be possible. Dream Focus 19:33, 7 March 2009 (UTC)
- Delete in-world content having no real-world notability --Sloane (talk) 23:57, 7 March 2009 (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.