Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of non-Kremling Donkey Kong enemies
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. Davewild (talk) 21:50, 23 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
List of non-Kremling Donkey Kong enemies
- )
This article has no sourcing, written in an in-universe way that tries to duplicate the Donkey Kong game articles. It has no notability, and as such is just a bunch of original research. If this isn't a violation of "Wikipedia isn't a fan site", than there is no such thing. Judgesurreal777 (talk) 16:31, 17 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete as pure fancruft, unsourced, trivial, etc. Ten Pound Hammer • (Broken clamshells•Otter chirps) 19:14, 17 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. I totally agree on the counts that there are too much trivial bits and that this is unsourced, but please do explain since when is something Donkey Kong-related not notable? This has to be spun out into its own entry unless you want to overcrowd the relevant game articles. - Mgm|(talk) 23:30, 17 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment. I want to say keep, but mainly becuase of the amount of work I've put into it, and because if this isn't notable, practically nothing else I've created is. When this was created, the notability criteria weren't so clearly defined, and this seemed quite reasonable. I don't think we're going to find independent or unofficial sources for half of this article's information, but on principle I would say that the fact that the games are popular and that the information comes from the games themselves ought to satisfy any notability criteria. RobbieG (talk) 17:54, 23 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Changed my mind - Donkey Kong's animal buddies got deleted, and whilst I think it shouldn't have been for the reasons given above, this is certainly no more notable. I don't know much about Wikia, but if they have a relevant site, I propose that this be transwikied to there, and deleted. RobbieG (talk) 18:03, 23 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been added to the ]
- 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.