Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Dragon Quest VIII characters: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 23:04, 15 June 2008

List of Dragon Quest VIII characters

This article asserts zero notability through reliable sources, and is just a repetition of the character and plot sections of Dragon Quest VIII; it is therefore duplicative and should be deleted Judgesurreal777 (talk) 16:56, 10 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been added to the list of video game related deletions. Kariteh (talk) 17:18, June 10, 2008 (UTC)

Delete These characters only appeared in one episode, and the article fails WP:N and WP:VGSCOPE. Might be transwikied to a Dragon Quest wikia if such wikia exists. Kariteh (talk) 17:25, 10 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Completely non-notable. Doubtful sources exist to establish notability. Doctorfluffy (robe and wizard hat) 19:42, 10 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Dragon Quest VIII is a notable game and this list is an extension of that notable article. The characters are referenced in the game itself and in the guides that came out for the game. --Pinkkeith (talk) 21:42, 10 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Dragon Quest VIII is a notable game, but notability is not inherited. This list of characters should establish its own notability per WP:N and WP:VGSCOPE, but it currently doesn't and hasn't shown any sign of possible improvement for two years. Per WP:V, establishing notability is done through the usage of independent sources, not the game itself or guides published by the game's company (primary sources). Kariteh (talk) 07:53, 11 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  - Don't confuse WP:SPINOUT with WP:ITSA. This in an extension of the article due to size limits. It's not a category of a certain subject per se. --Pinkkeith (talk) 15:28, 12 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    - I'm not confusing the two. The WikiProject Video games has more specific guidelines than the general ones. As I said above, the article fails WP:VGSCOPE: "A smaller article should only be split from a larger topic if the new article would itself be notable.", "A concise plot summary is appropriate to cover a notable game, character, or setting. Information beyond that is unnecessary and should be removed." Information such as in-universe biography and game-guide details like "Yangus is the party's physical tank, with the highest HP, defence, and physical attack strength" are excessive and should not be present. If these details are cut from the article, it becomes short enough (and duplicative) to not warrant a page separated from the main game article; it would thus need to establish its own notability if it were to remain separate. Since it doesn't and cannot, I believe it should be deleted/redirected. Kariteh (talk) 09:05, 14 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - no claim of notability. not a how-to but bordering on being a game guide --T-rex 23:34, 10 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep but requires major cleanup, possibility moving the main characters section from the main DQ8 page to here (replacing the content presently), and making sure to treat the characters out-of-universe and avoiding plot repetition as much as possible. A list of characters from a game (without notability) is a reasonable supporting article to avoid main article SIZE problems, but it needs to avoid excessive rambling and plot reiteration as this one presently does, as well as issues with overuse of images. --MASEM 14:32, 11 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Wikipedia:Lists (discriminate, verifiable, encyclopedic, and notable list). Even if it is duplicatd elsewhere, then we can merge and redirect without deletion in the worst case scenario. Sufficient editor efforts and reader interest as well. Consistent per our First pillar with a specialized encyclopedia or almanac on characters. Sincerely, --Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles^Tally-ho! 21:49, 11 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- The first pillar of Wikipedia is a very generic statement; it and WP:LIST do not trump specific guidelines such as WP:VGSCOPE. Verifiability does not trump notability either. Kariteh (talk) 09:05, 14 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  - The articles are consistent with our policies, however, which trump the guidelines. The article actually passes WP:VGSCOPE because lists of characters are necessary and notable. There is no consensus that such articles do not meet our guidelines and more people (those creating and editing these articles plus those arguing to keep in the AfDs) actually agree that such articles are suitable for Wikipedia. Sincerely, --Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles^Tally-ho! 19:07, 14 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    - The article is not consistent with the policies as it fails to establish notability. Separate lists of characters are not "necessary" when the encyclopedic information can fit in the main game article. Kariteh (talk) 20:08, 14 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Clean up with a chainsaw and merge to Dragon Quest VIII. Generally, if you find a bad character list article that isn't hopeless gibberish or "Background characters #1-37", that's going to be your best bet. Both articles are in pretty dire condition anyway. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 21:59, 11 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Generally, this sort of article is the compromise way to go to avoid the clutter of individual articles. when I see them I think there's a chance that people are trying to edit and organize the material in a reasonable manner. DGG (talk) 04:35, 12 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Another compromise way to avoid the clutter of individual articles is to cover them in a single article on the game when independent, reliable sources covering more-specific aspects of that game do not exist. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 19:46, 14 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
in practice, such extensive merges either give cumbersome articles, or end up in deleting content. But the question of whether to merge this is for the article talk page, not here--therefore it probably wouldnt have been brought here to afd at all, unless the intent was in fact to remove the content. DGG (talk) 17:25, 15 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
They end up deleting excessive plot summary. This is necessary and valuable. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 20:51, 15 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Not notable because there are no reliable independent sources that offer significant coverage of these characters. Spinouts still need to assert notability, as per WP:AVOIDSPLIT and the first plank of the video game guidelines on inappropriate content. "Let's compromise" can't work because there's no such thing as half-way notability. Either this is notable or it isn't. Searches reveal that it's not. If someone believes otherwise, they should produce that evidence. Randomran (talk) 23:04, 15 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 24: / Line 24: @@
 *::in practice, such extensive merges either give cumbersome articles, or end up in deleting content. But the question of whether to merge this is for the article talk page, not here--therefore it probably wouldnt have been brought here to afd at all, unless the intent was in fact to remove the content. '''[[User:DGG|DGG]]''' ([[User talk:DGG|talk]]) 17:25, 15 June 2008 (UTC)
 *:::They end up deleting excessive plot summary. This is necessary and valuable. - [[User:A Man In Black|A Man In <font color="black">'''Bl♟ck'''</font>]] <small>([[User talk:A_Man_In_Black|conspire]] | [[Special:Contributions/A Man In Black|past ops]])</small> 20:51, 15 June 2008 (UTC)
+* '''Delete''': Not notable because there are no reliable independent sources that offer significant coverage of these characters. Spinouts still need to assert notability, as per [[WP:AVOIDSPLIT]] and [[WP:GAMECRUFT|the first plank of the video game guidelines on inappropriate content]]. "Let's compromise" can't work because there's no such thing as half-way notability. Either this is notable or it isn't. Searches reveal that it's not. If someone believes otherwise, they should produce that evidence. [[User:Randomran|Randomran]] ([[User talk:Randomran|talk]]) 23:04, 15 June 2008 (UTC)