Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nintendo Princesses

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. StarM 04:37, 10 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Nintendo Princesses

Unencyclopedic in present form, no references or reliable third party sources, mostly unusable in present state. Thor Malmjursson (talk) 22:35, 5 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. Redundant to other Nintendo articles.--SarekOfVulcan (talk) 23:15, 5 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of video game related deletions. MuZemike (talk) 00:31, 6 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep — I was thinking of what would happen if this was to, say, become a character list, but it still might be too overcategorized, I'm afraid. Otherwise, it needs cleanup and referencing as opposed to outright deletion. —Preceding unsigned comment added by MuZemike (talk • contribs) 00:31, 6 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Totally unreferenced - may well be MADEUP. — RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 04:04, 6 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- They are characters from games made by Nintendo. Maybe you meant original research? MuZemike (talk) 04:24, 6 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - these characters have already been written about either in their own article, or on the article for their respective games. Marasmusine (talk) 10:42, 6 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - redundant with other articles.--Boffob (talk) 14:39, 6 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - redundant and is an indiscriminate list. --MASEM 15:59, 6 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, information on these characters is found elsewhere, there is no need to have this page. Pagra shtak 16:26, 6 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete out and out original research. JuJube (talk) 17:39, 6 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - all entries have their individual entries, no need for this article -- Whpq (talk) 18:29, 6 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Wholly unnecessary list. It's an arbitrary idea - why Princesses? Why not Princes, or Aliens, or Frogs (which would include Wart, Save Frog, Frog Suit Mario, Jam, Prince Froggy, etc.)? - A Link to the Past (talk) 09:02, 7 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - redundant, unnecessary cross-categorization. Randomran (talk) 06:17, 8 November 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.