Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Transformers Label series

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 delete. Tone 16:37, 20 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Transformers Label series

[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)

Non-notable toy line/list of toys TTN (talk) 15:16, 13 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. TTN (talk) 15:16, 13 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Comics and animation-related deletion discussions. TTN (talk) 15:16, 13 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Anime and manga-related deletion discussions. TTN (talk) 15:16, 13 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. I don't have a transforming robot horse in this race. I suspect this sub-line of toys isn't independently notable, but it was also a Japanese exclusive release, so ideally we'd check Japanese media before shuffling this off; I have no idea where to look for that, and don't read Japanese. But let's set that aside for the moment and talk ATD. I'm fairly sure that everyone can agree that the Transformers toys, writ large, are a notable topic, even notwithstanding the terrible shape our article space is in. In my mind, that means we should have a merge/redirect target list that would include this line. I don't know whether that's ideally a List of Transformers toy lines that just addresses them on the product-line level or a List of Transformers toys that's more detailed. Some of these decisions require editorial judgment in a field that I've done no source examination of, and am not qualified to opine about. But I am qualified to state: that's one of the reasons why we have lists for the member components of notable categories (but for which not all the individual elements are themselves notable). Technically, I guess that's currently at Transformers (toy line)#Transformers toylines, but that's a sad dog of an embedded list. I know there are interested editors in the topic area; surely we can do better? Squeamish Ossifrage (talk) 15:43, 13 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Honestly, as with a lot of these franchises, this whole set of articles needs a mountain-full of TNT and a weedwacker applied to any notable topic. You'd need a dedicated specialist from the ground-up to get anywhere with the current set of articles. The references are full of fan sites. The articles cater to the hardcore fan. The formatting of most of the articles, especially the fictional characters, is absolutely atrocious. I don't think there is any benefit to saving any of the current content. TTN (talk) 16:44, 13 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

And I think, more than anything, that's where we philosophically disagree. Neither of us want "articles" (using the term rather loosely, to be honest) that look like this. I tend to think this sort of thing makes it easier for future editors to determine what needs to be indexed and sourced; you would prefer we pave it over and start from scratch. I'm... not sure that either of those approaches actually gets compliant article copy written, sadly. Squeamish Ossifrage (talk) 20:09, 13 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - This entire article is referenced by a fan forum. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 16:29, 13 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Clear fail of WP:GNG, not notable._{ZXCVBNM (TALK)} 20:58, 13 November 2019 (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.