Jump to content

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Silverbolt (Beast Wars)

Add links
From 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 delete. Spartaz Humbug! 03:38, 29 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Silverbolt (Beast Wars)

[edit]
Silverbolt (Beast Wars) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log • AfD statistics)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Non-notable fictional character sourced only to primary sources and thus fails WP:GNG. A merge to a minor characters list is usually appropriate here but none appears to exist. Horrible non-free violation as well. Macr86 (talk) 03:07, 12 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ahem:

...it is important to realize that countering the keep or delete arguments of other people, or dismissing them outright, by simply referring them to this essay is not encouraged

— Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions
. NotARealWord (talk) 18:36, 12 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment that doesn't make the reasoning for deletion any more valid. J Milburn made an invalid arguement as to why something should be deleted. Divebomb merely pointed it out to him in an unrecommended manner. They are not the same thing.Mathewignash (talk) 18:54, 12 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Nobody has brought up any reasons to delete this page (albeit invalid ones). As Mathewignash said above, there's already third party sources in this. This casts serious doubt on the claim that it is non-notable.--Piast93 (talk) 17:52, 13 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment To address one of your issues, the link to the page on Jetstorm that doesn't mention "Silverbolt", if you read the article, you will note that for a time Silverbolt went by the name Jetstorm. So this is an article talking about him. Mathewignash (talk) 10:56, 14 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Spartaz Humbug! 13:57, 21 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • It would be much easier to establish a consensus if both sides enumerates the sources and summaried why they considered them to be reliable/unreliable for the purpose of establishing notability. Right now the delete side say they don'r cut the mustard and the keep side say they do. We actually need to understand why to work out the consensus here. Spartaz Humbug! 13:59, 21 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Sock of banned user. –MuZemike 23:35, 23 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - Perhaps he means the deleted page for Silverbolt, which was also lacking enough notability. Maybe we should author a single page for both Silverbolts, with all the citations on both, and see if THAT has enough notabiliity! Mathewignash (talk) 22:05, 23 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Besides being heroic Transformers named Silverbolt who are the team flyers in their series, and being silver, and being made on Earth in the second season of their series... wait a minute... which is which again? Mathewignash (talk) 23:38, 23 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Come on now, G1 Silverbolt was afraid of heights, he led a team of sentient jets, was a combiner, and had no love interest. Neither were actually the "team flyers" in their series, when BW silverbolt debuted other Maximals could already fly, and G1 Silverbolt was part of a team of flyers. Neither of them were built on earth. NotARealWord (talk) 23:41, 23 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Silverbolt was built on Earth in the Marvel Comics. Mathewignash (talk) 02:20, 24 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
That's just one silverbolt, not both. Still, it is no more appropriate to cover the Fuzor and the aerialbot in the same article than it is to cover Megatron (Beast Era) with the original Megatron. Indeed, the Megatrons have more in common than the two Silverbolts honestly. NotARealWord (talk) 10:00, 24 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thing is if this one ends up being as KEEP, then he's the only Transformers character named Silverbolt who would have a page on Wikipedia, so he should probably be moved to Silverbolt (Transformers). Then once he's there I would probably add a mention of the Generation 1 character, or at least a link to the Aerialbots article. Mathewignash (talk) 18:21, 27 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • They are publications aimed at a fan audience. And "available on amazon.com and at your local library system" does not necessarily mean a scholarly or reliable source. I would suggest that The Unofficial Guide to Transformers 1980s Through 1990s Revised & Expanded 2nd Edition is neither. HrafnTalkStalk(P) 17:45, 26 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thank goodness then he wrote that book 6 years BEFORE he was hired by Fun Publications. You have to judge a source by when it was written, and it was written by someone who didn't work for Fun Publications. Mathewignash (talk) 14:48, 27 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • That website you pointed to is inactive. The community that uilt it up until 5000+ articles left wikia and put up a new site on a different server. Plus, it's article format would mean that it should not accept Wikipedia's articles. The new site also won't accept Wikipedia articles. NotARealWord (talk) 00:46, 28 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
They already have an article there. http://transformers.wikia.com/wiki/Silverbolt_(BW) And its still active. 7,452 pages on their wiki. Thousands of people a month still visit this article [4] on Wikipedia though, and no telling how many have seen it total over the years. But Wikipedia has unfortunately changed. The evil snotty elitist deletionists have won. Why just nominate all remaining Transformer articles at once, and kill them off like that, instead of wasting time picking them off one at a time or in small groups? Dream Focus 01:59, 28 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
If you have an opinion on this article, feel free to voice it. Mathewignash (talk) 10:54, 28 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Ahem, if you actually check, transformers.wikia.com is not growin fast enouh compared to all the new Transformers material coming out. Compare to the much more complete tfwiki.net. More than 11,000 articles and an active editorship that usually know what they're doing. NotARealWord (talk) 16:57, 28 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Forgive me for being unaware of the most active and up to date compendium on knowledge of the Transformers. Transwiki it wherever you want, I don't care. It just doesn't belong here. Trust me, I know. After all, I'm just one of the many unreasonable vicious hordes of deletionists trying to destroy yet another decent legitimate article. SnottyWong talk 17:35, 28 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I seriously don't think there is any place to transwiki this stuff. NotARealWord (talk) 18:12, 28 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Its not encylopedic! I believe we should erase every single article that wouldn't impress all the snotty elistists. I want Wikipedia to be taken seriously by the snobs, instead of just being loved and used by millions of common folk. I ask myself, is this something the Harvard graduates working at a major big city newspaper would like? What about other members of high society? Its not in style unless the fashion magazines tell us it is, and you can't be seen wearing something that simply isn't something they personally consider tasteful at the moment. We should never try to think for ourselves, and form our own opinions, just do whatever the popular kids might want us to do. Mozart fanatic 77 (talk) 17:39, 28 December 2010 (UTC)Comment by sockpuppet of banned user struck out - Burpelson AFB ✈ 18:39, 28 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per improvements by Mathewignash. Nice long interesting article, it now has 14 references! FeydHuxtable (talk) 00:43, 29 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per my comment above. Let tfwiki have this one. Black Kite (t) (c) 00:50, 29 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete- all the sources are useless. They are either broken links, fansites, toy catalogues or puffery put out by the producers of Transformers. The fact that someone has gone to a great deal of trouble to find evidence of notability, unfortunately, demonstrates the exact reverse if this is the best they've been able to find. Reyk YO! 01:52, 29 December 2010 (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/Silverbolt_(Beast_Wars)&oldid=1138768416"