Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pirena

Add links
Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
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 no consensus. It's pretty clear that there's no consensus to delete any of the listed articles. There seems to be a general agreement that merging is a reasonable option, but this shoudl be worked out by the editorial community. I note that mass-nominations are rarely useful, as they make it difficult to accurately assess the debated pages, so this is just as much a procedural close as it is one based off the relevant discussion. –Juliancolton | Talk 01:05, 3 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Pirena

Pirena (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Even though the article is a notable character in Philippine television, it's notability is on geographical context only. There is no references with the claims on the article hence fails WP:V. The article is also suspected of WP:NOR. JL 09 q?c 03:41, 16 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete (Pirena only) - "Notability in a geographical context only" isn't problematic; WP:ORG (while not directly relevant here) notes the general proposition that regional or national interest is usually sufficient to found encyclopaedic notability. The bigger problem is that the article contains no reliable sources (or sources of any sort at all) that would enable it to establish any notability whatsoever under WP:N, either as content in another article or as a stand-alone article. I have neither the time nor the inclination to do the necessary searches for each of the many other articles nominated below and feel they should have been nominated separately. - DustFormsWords (talk) 03:43, 16 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete I agree with the nominator and DustFormsWords' reasoning. --Pstanton (talk) 06:20, 16 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Additionals

I am also nominating the following related pages because of the same reason (is that these are the list of characters in Encantadia and Etheria that are problematic because these do not cite any sources, and I guess this is like those I nominated before, the Humanx Commonwealth AFDs.)--JL 09 q?c 04:06, 16 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I guess there are more individual articles in Wikipedia about the Encantadia and Etheria that doesn't need to be spin-out. I suggest inserting some summaries of these articles in Encantadia or Etheria because they were part of the show, like what happened in Universe of Avatar: The Last Airbender.--JL 09 q?c 04:04, 16 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

  • Please don't add additional nominations to an existing nomination. Sources for independent notability are likely to be different for each article, it confuses the discussion, and it assigns the views of those who've already expressed a viewpoint to articles they weren't considering when they made that argument. - DustFormsWords (talk) 04:02, 16 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
No, this does not to confuse those who already expressed their views. I'm following this and it happened that somebody already posted their view.--JL 09 q?c 04:04, 16 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete all and Thank you for adding additional nominations to the existing nomination. From what I understand, these are all characters on the Philippine TV show Encantadia and Etheria. The days of all TV characters on all TV shows being "entitled" to their own article on Wikipedia are over. Where there's a common thread, a mass nomination is appropriate. Otherwise, I'd have to paste this damn comment thirty times. Mandsford (talk) 18:28, 16 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - If you can be bothered to carefully read 30 articles to check that each one doesn't manage to assert individual notability then you can be bothered to paste the comment 30 times. Short of that, mass nominations are just a way for people to delete articles they've never read because they assume it to be like one they have. Take for example a nomination of Wiseguy (Simpsons character) - unarguably not worthy of his own article, and then a "by the way" listing of another 30 Simpsons characters including Homer Simpson, Bart Simpson and Lisa Simpson on the basis of "being similar articles". A reader totally unfamiliar with The Simpsons might read the Wiseguy article - and maybe one or two more - and then accept the nominator's assertion that the articles are all basically similar, with the result of a Delete argument being made for incredibly individually notable characters. Either you're going to read every article - in which case they can be listed separately - or you're not, in which case there's a miscarriage of process ocurring. - DustFormsWords (talk) 06:35, 17 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
That's a fair objection. I'll run down the list: Pirena, Amihan, Alena and Danaya are the four elemental Sang'gres and are all described as the main characters. Lira is called a major character. Ybrahim, Mine-a, Raquim, Hagorn, Asval, Cassiopea, Gurna, Aquil, Evades, Mira, Kahlil, Cassandra, Armea, Arman, Avria, Odessa, Andora, Juvila, Animus, Barkus, Memen, Hitano, Muyak, Armeo, Anthony, Bathalumang Ether, Emre, Cilatus, Agane, Muros, and Amarro are collateral characters. There is no showing in any of the articles of independent notability for any individual character, although arguably the five persons listed above might have been part of popular culture (I'd merge them all into the Sang'gres article). But most importantly, there is an Encantadia wiki that covers Books 1, 2 and 3 of the Encantadia series. Although Wikipedia thrived on fan articles back in 2005, entertainment Wikis have developed since then for fans. Mandsford (talk) 13:53, 17 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the good faith you've shown in independently checking the articles. On the Wiki point, though - I'm not aware of anything saying that Wikipedia should not include content simply because it's more thoroughly covered at some other location. Either the articles are notable and reliably sourced (which they're mostly not), or they aren't. - DustFormsWords (talk) 00:18, 18 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete and delete all if appropriate to say that here. my understanding of detailed articles on fictional characters is they can have articles if they have independent coverage from nonfansites, or at least something other than the book/tv/movie itself. a list of characters from this series would be a possible article, but the details are utterly nonnotable. i would love to see even one notable mention for any of these characters referenced here. are there any? how does this happen? do the articles start as innocent stubs, pass that stage, then get expanded this way?Mercurywoodrose (talk) 07:15, 16 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • merge into an appropriate list of characters. There seems no need for individual articles-- a merge should be the default solution. No argument whatsoever given for why a merge is unsuitable. Certainly none for why at least a redirect would not be appropriate. WP:Deletion Policy is the rule, that a redirect should be made instead of a deletion when possible. DGG ( talk )
  • Weak Keep of Danaya - the fan site sourced in the article gives me good reason to suspect the existence of Filipino-language sources testifying to her notability, which brings her into the realm of WP:FAILN - articles should not be deleted for lack of notability where sources are reasonably believed to exist until an active attempt has been made to find those sources. Which, by the way, demonstrates the issue with the group nomination. - DustFormsWords (talk) 06:42, 17 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
If I am not mistaken of interpreting DustFormsWords's weak keep suggestion for Danaya, the fansite mentioned in the external links section is not existing.--JL 09 q?c 22:05, 18 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Danaya. Yes, that fansite appears to have vanished, and Google searches turn up plenty of Encantadia fansites but none that I can see specifically dedicated to this character (or the actress who plays her). There might be a language issue but it's enough to say that there's no longer strong grounds to expect non-English sources. - DustFormsWords (talk) 23:34, 18 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - new entries added - just noting for what it's worth that new entries including Ornia have been added to the list of additional nominations AFTER all the above commentors expressed their opinions. - DustFormsWords (talk) 22:59, 19 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge per editing policy cited by DGG. Power.corrupts (talk) 09:29, 20 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge to an appropriate list. Edward321 (talk) 15:37, 21 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge sounds good. Abductive (reasoning) 07:05, 24 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge, per reasoning given by DDG. --RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 01:49, 25 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Fences&Windows 00:10, 25 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note: This debate has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. -- Fences&Windows 00:11, 25 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note: This debate has been included in the list of Philippines-related deletion discussions. -- Fences&Windows 00:11, 25 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment i have already "voted", but i went to 2 of the main articles on the tv shows spun off from here, and they had essentially no references (i trimmed out dead links, and have not looked for new ones). Im sorry, but this is a serious violation of WP guidelines to have so much unreferenced, unverifiable material. the character descriptions are all basically original research. I hope some fans of the show can contribute more references to show notability for even the main articles. Mercurywoodrose (talk) 02:59, 25 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note: I can't close this yet. I mean, I'd merge it, but all of the articles are way too big to put into a list (it would exceed 200k at least) together. If somebody with knowledge of the TV series could trim them and tell me, I'd be greatful; I would trim them, but I haven't ever even heard of this. m.o.p 05:32, 25 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note The Encantadia series is a number one prime time TV series in the Philippines along its sequel, Etheria. I'm Filipino and I'm not a fan of the show. ApprenticeFan talk contribs 14:13, 25 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep ALL per my reasoning of the thoughts of Dust From Words. Even the nominator appears to grant that "the article is a notable character in Philippine television, it's notability is on geographical context only". Their not being notable here is no reason to delete, and would call from input from Filipino Wikipedians with access to Tagalog hardcopy or online sources. Can help be requested from WP:CSB? That these characters are notable in the Phillipines allows me a resonable presumption that sources exists, even if also indicative of the great amount of work required to source them. Further, and with respects, placing so many difficult-to-source articles into one massive AFD precludes proper expansion through regular editing and as such does not best serve the project. Schmidt, MICHAEL Q. 19:18, 25 November 2009 (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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Pirena&oldid=1138235023"