Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Barigator

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 redirect to List of Zoids. MBisanz ^talk 02:26, 24 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Barigator

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) 22:10, 11 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keep No unneccesary plot details here. All real world information that can be improved by editing. There is no WP:DEADLINE. - Mgm|^(talk) 08:54, 12 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The "fictional Zoids universe"? I can't believe how many articles we have on that kind of fictional thing. OK, I'm an outsider in the Zoid field, and I'll believe in its notability when I see the sources. Drmies (talk) 22:17, 12 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect - No independent sources, mostly original research. Redirect to either the main article or to a listing page if there are sources for that. Wickethewok (talk) 17:08, 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, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:17, 16 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, Foxy Loxy ^Pounce! 23:46, 20 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keep and discuss whether or not to merge subsequently on the talk page. DGG (talk) 04:09, 21 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - because merging/redirecting will still be OR and have no RS. 16x9 (talk) 01:25, 22 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete or redirect Independent sources don't cover it and it would not meet the proposed WP:FICT (which has a lower threshold in general). Discussing a merger locally is an exercise in bureaucracy and invoking WP:DEADLINE is moot when the subject itself (rather than the article) doesn't meet the guideline for inclusion. Protonk (talk) 21:48, 23 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.