Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Phoenix Ikki

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. No problem if editors wish to create a redirect from this page. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:57, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Phoenix Ikki

[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)

Fictional character. While there is a reception section, it seems to be cobbled together from passing mentions (fails WP:SIGCOV). The lengthiest analysis supposedly comes from a source 6 that however, despite being archived, does not seem to exist (or at least I can't seem to click through to it). My BEFORE failed to find anything useful. The article, therefore, fails WP:GNG. At best, in the spirit of WP:PRESERVE, I recommend a merge of the creation and reception sections to List of Saint Seiya characters and redirecting the article there afterwards (and on that note, I invite interested editors to comment at Talk:List_of_Saint_Seiya_characters#Merge_from_the_list_of_anime-only_characters). _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 03:31, 22 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Fictional elements, Science fiction and fantasy, Comics and animation, and Anime and manga. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 03:31, 22 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Only passing mentions for this character and no WP:SIGCOV to demonstrate notability. A redirect to the manga, or the character list would be fine. Jontesta (talk) 13:53, 22 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Previously nominated via WP:PROD, ineligible for soft deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 03:35, 29 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Do note that it is still eligible for "soft" redirecting, without the need to "hard" delete the history. There is a valid redirect target, as I noted in my op. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 05:18, 29 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Delete/Redirect per Piotrus. This is mostly constructed from passing mentions and fails WP:SIGCOV. There is a valid redirect target, per WP:ATD. Shooterwalker (talk) 18:35, 1 October 2022 (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.