Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Optimus Prime (Transformers Animated)

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 merge to Optimus Prime. Spartaz ^Humbug! 16:17, 15 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Optimus Prime (Transformers Animated)

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

There is already an article at Optimus Prime which summarises this fictional character; this page appears to be of dubious notability, and does not have any significant reliable third-party sources. The sources which do exist are mainly long discredited fansites. Dwanyewest (talk) 00:35, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, an obvious keep here. The star of a TV series doesn't get deleted. If you need sources look here: http://www.highbeam.com/search/?searchTerm=%22optimus%20prime%22%20%22Transformers%20Animated%22&searchType=Article or here http://news.google.com/archivesearch?q=%22Optimus+Prime%22+%22Transformers+Animated%22+source%3A%22-newswire%22+source%3A%22-wire%22+source%3A%22-presswire%22+source%3A%22-PR%22+source%3A%22-release%22+source%3A%22-wikipedia%22&scoring=a If anything merge him back to the page he spun off of, the Optimus Prime (other incarnations) page. Mathewignash (talk) 00:59, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete/Merge - My god, there are FOUR articles that need to be disamibig'ed at Optimus Prime ? There should be, and I see there are merger tags, be ONE, with a subsection on various incarnations and appearances. Each appearance of a fictional character in various reboots and sequels and spinoffs does not merit a standalone article. Too much detail, too much fancruft. Overkill. Tarc (talk) 15:14, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete/Merge - I have to agree with Tarc, 4 separate Optimus Prime articles make absolutely no sense from the notability guidelines. I'll say it again, Transformers is the new Wikipedia Pokemon.--137.122.49.102 (talk) 16:16, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Comment This excessive fancruft of multiple incarnatitons is a problem with Megatron, Bumblebee (Transformers), Starscream (Transformers) and Cliffjumper (other incarnations). Dwanyewest (talk) 17:49, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Comics and animation-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 20:19, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 20:19, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Merge While a rare occasion, I agree with Tarc on this one. Jclemens (talk) 22:24, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I am willing to accept a merger as a compromise but all the toycruft has to be removed as well. Dwanyewest (talk) 00:46, 7 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I'd point out that the author of this deletion nomination had already written a merger proposal for this article. It seems like a bad faith nomination to delete, when all he really seemed to want was to use the Deletion Nomination to speed through his merger propoosal. If you don't REALLY think an article should be deleted, don't use the deletion proposal as a weapon to get your way. 198.51.174.5 (talk) 16:42, 7 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

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.