Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Soul Reaper (Bleach)

Soul Reaper (Bleach)

Soul Reaper (Bleach) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)

Fails WP:N, WP:PLOT, WP:WAF, and WP:FICT. The topic of the various "species" within the Bleach series has not "received significant real-world coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject." Extremely excessive in-universe article sprinkled with personal essay style "discussion" and OR. Redundant to the List of Soul Reapers in Bleach, which already adequately covers the topic in an appropriate fashion.

I am also nominating the following related pages because they all fail the same guidelines and are redundant to their respective lists:

Bount (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (redundant to List of Bounts in Bleach)

Hollow (Bleach) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (redundant to List of hollows in Bleach)

-- [[::User:Collectonian|Collectonian]] ([[::User talk:Collectonian|talk]] · [[::Special:Contributions/Collectonian|contribs]]) 15:08, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Anime and manga-related deletion discussions. -- -- [[::User:Collectonian|Collectonian]] ([[::User talk:Collectonian|talk]] · [[::Special:Contributions/Collectonian|contribs]]) 15:12, 15 July 2008 (UTC)
• Procedural keep for the following reasons:
  1. The nominator copied and pasted the nomination of another article without changing much or specifying why this specific article should be deleted
  2. The nominator hasn't specified what changed from the previous 2 AfDs, which have also not been linked in this nominator (this is bad form)
  3. The nomination is misleading, and only specifies 2 more articles nominated in the nom's rationale, not in the title, which it should.
• If the above problems are fixed, I'll gladly provide an explanation why these articles should be kept, although the argument is similar to the other nomination. -- Ynhockey ^(Talk) 17:56, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

First has been fixed. An error in the AfD is not a valid PK reason. Also, there is one previous AfD for Soul Reapers (which apparently the AfD page didn't pick up). This AfD nom has different reasons than the previous one and is perfectly valid, particularly when most of the keeps were versions of WP:ILIKEIT and acknowledge the problems now being noted here. -- [[::User:Collectonian|Collectonian]] ([[::User talk:Collectonian|talk]] · [[::Special:Contributions/Collectonian|contribs]]) 18:01, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Reply - also, it should be noted that the previous reason for nomination (the result of which was decisive keep) was indeed very similar to the current reason, which is, insufficient out of universe coverage. This should be reason enough to remove the nomination, but it's up to the administrators. Meanwhile, I'll try to find the second nomination, which has apparently been lost among the mass of edits... -- Ynhockey ^(Talk) 18:11, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Comment - for any administrator who may be reviewing this AfD, please note that Collectonian refactored my comment. While I assume good faith and hope it was just an accident, I think that if it turns out to be intentional, immediate action should be taken. -- Ynhockey ^(Talk) 18:07, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

If you assumed good faith, you wouldn't have even put a note. It got "refactored" because of an edit conflict while I was fixing the nom you were complaining about. -- [[::User:Collectonian|Collectonian]] ([[::User talk:Collectonian|talk]] · [[::Special:Contributions/Collectonian|contribs]]) 18:10, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

• Delete - all quite blatantly fail WP:NOTE, WP:NOT#PLOT (and I'm sorry, Ynhockey, there's really no way I could possibly improve them that would allow them to pass NOTE). If possible, a Universe of Bleach article might be an appropriate merge target, but only after the material is heavily reduced. Sephiroth BCR ^(Converse) 18:23, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

• Delete - Per comments from Sephiroth.Tintor2 (talk) 18:25, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

• Delete or Merge to List of Soul Reapers in Bleach if there is anything worth salvaging. Doceirias (talk) 20:06, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

• Delete. Just leave it at the lists of characters, everything worth anything is there.StardustDragon 21:03, 15 July 2008 (UTC)
• Delete Fancruft. Madman (talk) 21:23, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

• Delete per nom. A transwiki to the Bleach wikia would be legit. Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 23:23, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

• Merge/redirect to List of Soul Reapers in Bleach, List of Bounts in Bleach, and List of hollows in Bleach. This is waaaay too much detail, but there might be something salvageable. -- Ned Scott 05:15, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

• Keep but improve The List of Bounts in Bleach merge looks fine, but the other two articles are too big to merge with their respective lists, and while they could use some trimming of particularly useless information (such as the indepth description of each character's minor uniform differences in Soul Reaper (Bleach), that would still leave them too large, especially since any consolidation of Bleach articles (which Collectonian seems to be pushing for with his latest AfD spree) would probably involve other articles being merged INTO the Soul Reaper and Hollow articles. Considering Bleach's popularity, I consider it quite likely that they have, in fact, "received significant real-world coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject" and that those sources simply need to be found. Also, doesn't Wikipedia policy state that you should try to improve articles when possible before nominating them for deletion? I wouldn't have brought this up if you'd made any attempt to discuss improving the article with WP:BLEACH (or even notified them that the article didn't meet Wikipedia standards) before putting a bunch of articles related to a popular anime up for deletion, just like you did last week. To be clear, I'm not accusing the nominator of bad faith, I'm just suggesting that when he finds articles that don't meet Wikipedia's standards, he should ask editors familiar with the content to fix the problems rather than proceeding straight to a deletion nomination. There's quite a few anime-related articles out there; WP:ANIME can't be expected to keep them ALL up to standards if no one works with them or even at least notifies them of problems. 65.33.206.108 (talk) 18:55, 16 July 2008 (UTC)