Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Arosaurer

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 list of Zoids. MBisanz ^talk 01:13, 21 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Arosaurer

This fictional weapon does not establish notability independent of Zoids through the inclusion of real world information from reliable, third party sources. Most of the information is made up of original research, trivial model details, and unnecessary plot details. There is no current assertion for future improvement of the article, and this is too trivial to require any separate coverage. TTN (talk) 20:39, 12 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Merge into a list of Zoids. A whole article for each Zoid is a bit much, but we should keep at least the more notable ones for people who come to wikipedia looking to learn, as WP is probably an early stop for someone unfamiliar with the show. Tealwisp (talk) 21:53, 12 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

discuss how to merge in the appropriate place, which is not here. DGG (talk) 03:48, 13 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 20:19, 17 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 20:20, 17 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Endorse Merge and truncation of indiscriminate materil Per usual treatment of fiction, only major characters belong on wikipedia, minor ones can be mentioned in the "list of _____ characters" articles, but do not warrant their own article. WP is not a repository for fictional plot, or a place for indiscriminate information. ηoian ‡orever ηew ‡rontiers 23:33, 17 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Merge per Noian. The Locke (talk) 00:26, 18 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Merge per Noian. It might not warrant a separate article, but the nominator does not indicate why it doesn't deserve coverage at all. They did not look for references prior to deletion and did not consider the usual treatment of fictional characters. - Mgm|^(talk) 09:39, 18 December 2008 (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.