Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Mega Man cast members
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 delete. Cirt (talk) 08:04, 22 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
List of Mega Man cast members
- List of Mega Man cast members (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)
Contested
PROD. Was listified from Category:Mega Man cast members
eons ago. Basically a full-credit list of all cast members from all Mega Man video games that does not provide anything else for detalis—basically indiscriminate information.
I am also nominating the following related page for the exact same rationale as above (just replace the word Mega Man with Metal Gear):
- List of Metal Gear cast members (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
MuZemike 16:45, 17 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the ]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. —MuZemike 16:45, 17 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete as an Notability of the subject matter isn't apparant, either. Why this was listified from the category and why the category was deleted is beyond me. This should be unlistified and recategorized. ThemFromSpace 17:24, 17 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete per Themfromspace. Too many problems (missing sections, intro, + others). talk 18:02, 17 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. I prodded this and the other mentioned article for basically similar reasons. The information is unsourced and trivial.じんない 20:13, 17 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- I note that the deletion rationale here would apply to every single category on wikipedia :) Nerfari (talk) 21:12, 17 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete - per Themfromspace. One of many such articles. --Orange Mike | Talk 21:20, 17 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete:Agree that both are indiscriminate collections of information that demonstrate little encyclopedic value. Even if it emulates a category, the category is such an obscure cross section that it also proves to be of little encyclopedic value. (Guyinblack25 talk 21:42, 17 March 2009 (UTC))[reply]- Delete Mega Man, but Neutral on Metal Gear per discussion below. (Guyinblack25 talk 20:02, 21 March 2009 (UTC))[reply]
- Merge with the respected pages. talk) 10:07, 18 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete Lists that try to emulate categories are a basic WP:CLN nono. The category itself would be overcategorization. Since the list is indiscriminate in which voice actors it includes and doesn't provide any detailed information on the roles they played in which part of the series, it lacks encyclopedic value and violates multiple list guidelines which aren't easy to solve. - Mgm|(talk) 10:20, 18 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete per MGM. Lists that try to emulate categores are a basic no-no and what WP:CLN says about them is very silly. I must also say I sympathize with Themfromspace's inability to comprehend the closing rationale of the category deletion, it's almost incoherent, but Nerfari seems to have the gist of it. Benefix (talk) 22:26, 18 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- I agree completely. That CFD (Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2007 January 25) was a mess. I, too, am wondering how they got a delete out of that. MuZemike 00:53, 19 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Note that ]
- While Benefix has stated he/she violated Wikipedia:Sock puppetry, I'd like to point out that "a sock puppet is an alternative account used for fraudulent, disruptive, or otherwise deceptive purposes". Benefix's contributions do not seem to be doing that, and they've further stated that this user account is a Single-purpose account, which is not against policy. (Guyinblack25 talk 15:00, 20 March 2009 (UTC))[reply]
- By not disclosing the main account Benefix is associated with, I believe this user is using the account to ]
- True, but the "Avoid scrutiny" section stipulates that the reason is to "confuse or deceive editors". Benefix's contributions do not seem to be "fraudulent, disruptive, or otherwise deceptive". Also, coming forth and admitting that they have an alternate account basically prohibits such behavior because it attracts scrutiny. One wrong step and the account is blocked. What puppeteer would put themselves in a situation where they could not use the puppet to its full extent?
Regardless, I agree the use of the account without disclosure of its related account does paint a bad picture. However, that is a discussion for a forum different from this one. (Guyinblack25 talk 22:46, 20 March 2009 (UTC))[reply]
- True, but the "Avoid scrutiny" section stipulates that the reason is to "confuse or deceive editors". Benefix's contributions do not seem to be "fraudulent, disruptive, or otherwise deceptive". Also, coming forth and admitting that they have an alternate account basically prohibits such behavior because it attracts scrutiny. One wrong step and the account is blocked. What puppeteer would put themselves in a situation where they could not use the puppet to its full extent?
- By not disclosing the main account Benefix is associated with, I believe this user is using the account to ]
- While Benefix has stated he/she violated
- Delete - No indication of importance to warrant article namespace. Better covered as a category. —Mythdon (talk • contribs) 23:52, 18 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- STRONG KEEP and improve. I must stop this pile-on deletefest before this gets imperfect list article over time. I'd work on it myself but I am currently extremely busy with real-life events (I wouldn't even have commented here today if I didn't think a snowball was approaching). DHowell (talk) 03:11, 20 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- While I can appreciate the level of detail put into your posting, I feel I have to still disagree.
- Benefix is not the only one that believes the list should be deleted, and other reasons have been provide.
- Several members from WP:Video games, which this article falls under, do not feel this list is a suitable topic for Wikipedia. While our voices technically do not carry any more weight than any other editor, we had to deal with numerous similar topics and have developed a good idea of what is a suitable video game page on Wikipedia.
- Though unsourced content is a fixable problem, sourcing would necessarily make this article suitable for Wikipedia.
- While WP:IINFOonly explicitly states that FAQs, plot summaries, lyrics, statistics, and news reports are not allowed on Wikipedia, that portion of the policy lists them as examples to further illustrate that "merely being true, or even verifiable, does not automatically make something suitable for inclusion in the encyclopedia."
- Furthermore, just because the policy does not explicitly prohibit something doesn't make it suitable for Wikipedia. WP:NOT. We have to read the policy and interpret the core idea.
- While I can't say with a 100% certainty that this list cannot be improved to a level suitable for Wikipedia, I do not think it is a likely or viable option. If you truly believe it can be improved, it might be worthwhile to try creating a draft in your user page or transferring the content to Mega Man Wiki.
- Sorry, but I still believe the list is not suitable for Wikipedia and should be deleted. (Guyinblack25 talk 15:00, 20 March 2009 (UTC))[reply]
- What you seem to be saying is that even a well-sourced, verified version of this list with information beyond just a simple list of names would still not necessarily be "suitable for inclusion in the encyclopedia." What I'm trying to understand, is what exactly makes this list topic unsuitable? What is the "core idea" being violated here? What exactly distinguishes this list topic (not the current incarnation of the list) from, for example, List of voice actors in the Grand Theft Auto series, a featured list, which was created looking like this, a list created from a category which was deleted per the same CFD? Why would it not be likely or viable that this list could be brought up to the standards of the GTA series list? If a list of GTA voice actors can become "one of the best lists in Wikipedia," why would a list of Mega Man or Metal Gear voice actors be a "terrible idea"? DHowell (talk) 18:53, 20 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- I'll be quite honest with you. That version of GTA voice actors was horrendous and I would take a similar stance against it. As I said, however, I don't believe the endeavor is impossible. If you can clean up the list and demonstrate notability, then more power to you. That's why I suggested creating a draft or moving it to another wiki. But in its current form and my knowledge of the series, I do not believe the list is a good idea. While the existence of a similar list topicdoes show poor content can be exceptionally cleaned up, it does not prove to me that every such list can go from rags to riches.
- The reason verifiability is not enough is because of Wikipedia:Notability. Topics need to be notable to be on Wikipedia. Though the Mega Man series and individual voice actors are notable, what makes being a Mega Man voice actor notable? The GTA series received a good deal of press targeted at its voice acting and ability to acquire high profile and high caliber celebrities. To my knowledge, the Mega Man and Metal Gear Solid series has not received anywhere near the amount of similar reception. If sources can be found that deal specifically with the series' voice actors, then I'll be happy to change my opinion about this topic. (Guyinblack25 talk 22:46, 20 March 2009 (UTC))[reply]
- Personally, while the notability guideline has its uses, I really think it is something that ought to be FUTON bias prevents us from finding may sources, though, that could build up a better case for notability for these lists. But what I don't understand is the need to put these lists in wiki-ghettos until they can "prove their worth". It's not like this is a "list of people who had a hamburger for lunch the other day" or some such silly list. It's a list of notable people categorized under something they are notable for. It shouldn't be required that a list have the likes of Samuel L. Jackson or Kyle MacLachlan (i.e. people who generate a ton of coverage for just about anything they do) in order to exist on Wikipedia; ironically, I notice that many of the people listed on the GTA list don't even have articles, whereas every name on the Mega Man list and most of the names on the Metal Gear list are blue links. So a list with a few extremely famous people and a bunch of non-notables is great for Wikipedia, but a list entirely made up of notable people is a terrible idea? I still don't get it. DHowell (talk) 02:35, 21 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Given the sources you've found, I wouldn't be opposed to keeping the Metal Gear list provided it will get cleaned up. (Guyinblack25 talk 20:02, 21 March 2009 (UTC))[reply]
- Personally, while the notability guideline has its uses, I really think it is something that ought to be
- I'll be quite honest with you. That version of GTA voice actors was horrendous and I would take a similar stance against it. As I said, however, I don't believe the endeavor is impossible. If you can clean up the list and demonstrate notability, then more power to you. That's why I suggested creating a draft or moving it to another wiki. But in its current form and my knowledge of the series, I do not believe the list is a good idea. While the
- What you seem to be saying is that even a well-sourced, verified version of this list with information beyond just a simple list of names would still not necessarily be "suitable for inclusion in the encyclopedia." What I'm trying to understand, is what exactly makes this list topic unsuitable? What is the "core idea" being violated here? What exactly distinguishes this list topic (not the current incarnation of the list) from, for example,
- While I can appreciate the level of detail put into your posting, I feel I have to still disagree.
Delete The topic is a bit broad, the personalities of the characters don't stand out very much, and there isn't much of a point to the article at all- I doubt many people will wonder about the cast of characters in the game. Twinwarrior (talk) 03:32, 21 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete as an indiscriminate collection of information. Also, from WikiProject Video Game's guidelines: " Because the encyclopedia will be read by gamers and non-gamers alike, it is important not to clutter an article with a detailed description of how to play it or an excessive amount of non-encyclopedic trivia. A general rule of thumb to follow if unsure: If the content only has value to people actually playing the game, it is unsuitable. Always remember the bigger picture: video game articles should be readable and interesting to non-gamers." This list not only has no value to people who never played the game, nor would any non-player suddenly think "hey, why wouldn't I just look up what voice actors there are in Mega Man series", but I'm also ready to go on a limb and postulate that the list of voice actors can be found quite readily in each game's credit should a player wonder. MLauba (talk) 19:40, 21 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Why doesn't List of characters in the Mega Man series give the voice actors? Nerfari (talk) 21:56, 21 March 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.