Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Raiden Shogun: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 13:05, 24 June 2023

Raiden Shogun

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

I don't think this topic meets WP:N. A large number of the sources are from a content farm Valnet Inc. and the remainder appear to be WP:GAMECRUFT. I think this topic should be converted back into a redirect to Genshin Impact or List of Genshin Impact characters#Raiden Shogun. Aasim - Herrscher of Wikis ❄️ 18:03, 23 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Fictional elements and Video games. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 18:50, 23 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to List of Genshin Impact characters. Super WP:REFBOMB-y and lacks mentions of substance. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 18:57, 23 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
comment I feel there are some sources that can provide notability here if properly utilized: [1] published paper focusing on the character, [2] additional published paper examining her design. Looking at some of the sources too I feel they may not be entirely properly cited. While I feel she might be niche, it'd probably be better tagged as cleanup instead of merged for now.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 20:52, 23 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Is there proof these papers were cited by anyone? Simply being a published paper does not immediately indicate notability. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 21:17, 23 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
That feels a bit like moving the goalpost to be honest, Zx. I've never seen that argued before, even by you in all these previous afd's. But to answer your question google doesn't list any citations, just notes the first was published in the book "Sustainable Development in Creative Industries: Embracing Digital Culture for Humanities"--Kung Fu Man (talk) 21:28, 23 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
And would it be enough to just mention this source on one of the two pages I suggested be immediately merged? Aasim - Herrscher of Wikis ❄️ 22:05, 23 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
It's not moving the goalpost at all. WP:SCHOLARSHIP states that, one may be able to confirm that discussion of the source has entered mainstream academic discourse by checking what scholarly citations it has received. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 22:57, 23 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
That's not to the exclusion of the others, Zx. It's used as an option to confirm that the source has entered academic discourse as an alternative to the article being published and undergoing peer review, not an absolute requirement by itself. That's not how that works...--Kung Fu Man (talk) 23:31, 23 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I also think Zx is interpreting this incorrectly. The bullet point "Citation counts" talks about how you can in part use citation count to judge where a paper falls on a scale from a minority view to majority scholarly consensus, which is useful for determining how much weight to give it in a given article - but it does not say that a paper needs to have been cited to be an RS and usable on WP. The point "Reliable scholarship" is more important for this discussion, combined with the old A topic is presumed to be suitable for a stand-alone article or list when it has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject from WP:GNG. For the record, I don't know anything about this character, haven't looked into the specific sourcing situation, and don't know whether this particular article should exist or not - just speaking about WP:SCHOLARSHIP and GNG.--Alexandra^IDV 23:55, 23 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, it really seems like a significant misread of the guideline, and I think it'd be valuable for Zx to respond to clear this up. - Cukie Gherkin (talk) 11:35, 24 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

comment I do agree that most of the sources are pretty weak. However, there is nontrivial coverage from The Stanford Daily [3] that examines the character design in detail. Since this video game is not local to California, I believe this student newspaper article can count toward WP:N.

There were several nontrivial commentaries on how the second chapter of the story quest improves the game experience from siliconera and kotaku ([4] and [5]).

Screen Rant is on WP:RSP and has multiple sources in the article. Most of the articles are simple news coverages, but [6] and [7] could be considered nontrivial since the writer provides a plot analysis and reports a real-world event that demonstrates the popularity of this fictional character.

I did manage to find coverage from mainstream media such as Forbes ([8] archived on [9]). It mainly discusses building the character in-game. The article is certainly a nontrivial analysis, though I don't think it will provide much encyclopedic value.

@Nostalgiacn: I'm pinging the creator of the original article. He is active on the Chinese Wikipedia, so hopefully he is able to chime in here. PetraMagna (talk) 04:32, 24 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

None of these are convincing to me - either they discuss the characters and/or plot as a whole, making it more fitting for a list, are from content farm sites, or mention the character Raiden Shogun only in passing. There could very well be significant Chinese sources, but nothing jumps out at me in English as clearly and obviously significant and reliable. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 08:41, 24 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I believe the Stanford Daily article has enough coverage as it contains at least a paragraph dedicated to her aesthetics and contains numerous details on her clothing. The Kotaku article also stands strict scrutiny to me: it is about the game's plot, but in every paragraph mentions Raiden Shogun in some way since the plot is centered around her. PetraMagna (talk) 09:38, 24 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Cut, yeet, add, revise - I sense some refbombs and trivial information written to the article alone, some sources I found to be notable for inclusion, so a cleanup would be suitable. The almighty anomalocaris • chat 13:05, 24 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 24: / Line 24: @@
 ::None of these are convincing to me - either they discuss the characters and/or plot as a whole, making it more fitting for a list, are from content farm sites, or mention the character Raiden Shogun only in passing. There could very well be significant Chinese sources, but nothing jumps out at me in English as clearly and obviously significant and reliable.  [[User:Zxcvbnm|ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ]] ([[User talk:Zxcvbnm|ᴛ]]) 08:41, 24 June 2023 (UTC)
 :::I believe the Stanford Daily article has enough coverage as it contains at least a paragraph dedicated to her aesthetics and contains numerous details on her clothing. The Kotaku article also stands strict scrutiny to me: it is about the game's plot, but in every paragraph mentions Raiden Shogun in some way since the plot is centered around her. [[User:PetraMagna|PetraMagna]] ([[User talk:PetraMagna|talk]]) 09:38, 24 June 2023 (UTC)
+* '''{{abbr|Cut, yeet, add, revise|Comment}}''' -  I sense some refbombs and trivial information written to the article alone, some sources I found to be notable for inclusion, so a cleanup would be suitable. [[User:Xingqiu Viator|The almighty anomalocaris]] • [[User talk:Xingqiu Viator|chat]] 13:05, 24 June 2023 (UTC)