Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2014 December 29

29 December 2014

Ultraman_King – To the limited extent anybody other than the requester of this review has offered an opinion, it is to endorse the "redirect" closure. Absent a consensus to overturn it, that outcome therefore remains in force. –  Sandstein  14:50, 6 January 2015 (UTC)
The following is an archived debate of the deletion review of the page above. Please do not modify it.
Ultraman_King (talk|edit|history|logs|links|watch) (XfD|restore) Ultraman King is a very important character for the Ultraman franchise. He is THE ULTRAMAN , the God of them all. He appears in many Ultraman TV series and movies . Having pages on other ultramen and not Ultraman King is rediculous and is judgement from non fans , not even a tokusatsu fan! Ironically, the original erased Wiki info. on this character is all over the internet (but not on Wiki). The information on both English and Japanese versions are authentic, they are the same even though they are written by different people (including Japanese, they created the Ultraman franchise) . Anyone who are the fans of Ultraman will tell you the info. on the original page are authentic. Sources?? Well, I can give you the third party sources for every single info. on that page. "There is no current assertion for future improvement of the article," further improvement?? You can be sure there will be new info. regarding the character. Ultraman is a franchise, there will be new TV series , new movies , etc . Deleting the article is like deleting stand alone pages for Luke Skywalker or Darth Vader for the Star Wars articles. 205.206.217.74 (talk) 17:37, 29 December 2014 (UTC) The problem with the article is that Wikipedia articles aren't supposed to consist entirely of plot summaries from some fictional universe. If you're writing about a fictional character then you need to include something else as well. Take a look at our article on Darth Vader: although there is plot summary there it also has plenty of discussion of the creation of the character and its cultural impact, which is why any attempt to delete the article on these grounds would fail. Articles which are entirely plot summary get deleted or merged/redirected to another page about that fictional universe, as this one was. To address the problem you need to show that it's possible to write an acceptable article about this character which isn't entirely plot summary, in particular pointing to suitable sources we could use for the non-plot summary parts. That's the "improvement" the AfD was talking about. That there will be future fictional works to write plot summaries for or that the character is prominent in the fictional universe don't help. Hut 8.5 11:27, 31 December 2014 (UTC) There is no plot in the article , at least not in the Japanese version of the Wiki page.Unless there was something substantially changed in the article the last few months . The article I last read contained appearances of King in different episodes. It contained his power , weapons he used , his ability ,etc. The article had been on Wiki for many years. Suddenly , Wiki has a lot of "absurd" rules possibly dictated by some volunteers. No offense , that reminds me of someone is trying to look busy at work. Do we have people just graduated from some college? Whoever erased the Japanese version of this article, does he/she even read Japanese ?? The Japanese version of the article contains even more in depth info. than the English version, with references, now it is all gone , it is a disastrous decision, it will take a long time and many volunteers to submit those info. again. The article to which King page is directed even has a complaint about it being too long. Come on, several paragraphs?? I read pages with hi-tech/scientific info. much longer than that. Yes, there is a plot, becuase it is a movie , what else the page can talk about with the movie name as the title of the page. My point is not only about the King article, it is the whole atmosphere within the Wiki volunteer group. Nothing wrong with improving the Wiki site, the information site; but lately, they are taking INFORMATION away in the name of some absurd rules. It is ironic that there are many Ultraman sites with King's info. based on (if not copies of ) the original Wiki page, but the source of the info. is erased from Wiki. I also think it is absurd that only one if not a few people decide which articles are to be erased , even they are not experts in or fans of those topics/subjects. These people don't think about the effect of erasing an article ; also, I can't only see a few people even taking part in the so-called discussion before the page was erased. I am only complaining about this for Wiki's benefits. I can easily goto other sites in which more info. are available. You guys are "taking info." away, the "pedia" part of Wikipedia is gone. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 205.206.217.74 (talk) 21:19, 31 December 2014 (UTC) The article did not contain anything other than an in-universe description of the character's role in various fictional works. That is what WP:NOT#PLOT is trying to prevent. Wikipedia isn't an indiscriminate collection of information, as you will discover from clicking on that link. This rule is not new and has been in place for at least eight years. Articles about films can and should have information beyond in-universe description of plot elements - things like information on the making of the film, reception, cultural impact, etc. Hut 8.5 23:34, 31 December 2014 (UTC) RESPONSE: "did not contain anything other than an in-universe description of the character's role in various fictional works" Because whoever thinks that isn't a fan of the Ultraman franchise. Firstly , that is not the case, as I said, it has plenty of description about the character himself (power ability , some background); also whoever thinks that doesn't read Japanese. Secondly, that is what he is , the character was invented for such cases, he doesn't have any TV series / movie on his own, he sppears in other ultramen TV series , specials and movies; he is also an important character in the Ultraman universe, he helps and guilds others , in many ways , he is still mysterious. He is the God of all Ultramen and how can one talk about ultraman without a stand alone page on this character, he IS the ultraman. There are plenty of standalone Ultraman pages on Wiki (Noa , Leo , ....etc ), if they can have stand-alone pages, Ultraman King definitely qualifies for one. You can't just use one rule for everything, rather robotic. As I said, it is like there are a group of students or recent graduates in the editor roles. Are you guys from some English/journalism department in some universities?? I do not know all the rules and guildlines in Wiki but I come to Wiki for the info. The Japanese version of the page is very imformative (even way beyond the English version) , some are even from someones who are true fans of the franchise. I can say that erasing the Japanese version of the page was a major mistake. Some of the Japanese references are hard to find. You are discouraging Japanese from submitting valuable information. They know best for these tokusatsu shows, they created them. Even if that is the case (not comforming with all the stupid rules), one can rewrite the articles rather than erasing the pages. I certainly have no problems with the articles and I do not see many readers who are complaining but only the "Jedi council" is, they make the decision for the majority of the readers. I understand there are rules to keep the place "clean and neat" but as I said, in this case, it is rather robotic. It is a shame that both versions of the page (among others of other topics ) are deleted , Wiki has thrown away a lot of valuable information which is what I and probably the majority care. As I said , it is ridiculous that many other web sites have the information based on or are copies of the original Wiki pages, but Wiki has erased them. Anyway, I sense there is some politics behind erasing pages for this character and is wasting time here for so call appeal, it doesn't look like they are going to be reloaded and a waste of time to re-create them only to be erased again. Endorse, the article was pretty much just WP:PLOT, and there doesn't seem to be any error with the closure of the discussion itself. If you want to write an article on this character, I suggest putting together a draft that outlines the real world notability of the character (the Darth Vader article, noted above, is a good example of what's expected), and then bring the draft here for recreation. Lankiveil (speak to me) 02:28, 1 January 2015 (UTC). RESPONSE: It is impossible to write about the character in the same way as the Vader's article. Ultraman King wasn't written and created like that (The Ultraman franchise is not the Star Wars franchise, the former is a Japanese creation, the latter is a western creation, there is cultural differences). That's why I know you guys are not Ultraman fans and yet you guys determined that the article should be erased. Anyway, as I said, all valuable information is lost (particularly the Japanese version), impossible to rewrite even though I know where all the information comes from, but finding the details of the references is difficult . I have not saved the Japanese version of the article in which many references were included, or I could reproduce the English version from that, but I don't have the time to redo all the works input by others over the years. Although there are many English versions (copied from or quoted from Wiki) out there on the internet , most of them contain no references. This is a great loss of information for Wiki. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 205.206.217.74 (talk) 14:31, 1 January 2015 (UTC) The Japanese version is still around. Have a ball man https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E3%82%A6%E3%83%AB%E3%83%88%E3%83%A9%E3%83%9E%E3%83%B3%E3%82%AD%E3%83%B3%E3%82%B0 Shii (tock) 19:51, 3 January 2015 (UTC)
The above is an archive of the deletion review of the page listed in the heading. Please do not modify it.