Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Zabat

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. Stifle (talk) 00:39, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

Zabat

Zabat (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)

This fictional weapon does not establish notability independent of Zoids through the inclusion of real world information from reliable, third party sources. Most of the information is made up of original research, trivial model details, and unnecessary plot details. There is no current assertion for future improvement of the article, and this is too trivial to require any separate coverage. TTN (talk) 22:20, 11 December 2008 (UTC)

• reject for wrong venue or, if it is insited that this is a suitable place, Keep and then discuss a merge, in that order. There is no reason why we should not have a summary of this content; I dont think anyone would defend a full article,and the merge discussion should be straightforward enough. Please take this as applying to the entire group of nominations.DGG (talk) 03:41, 12 December 2008 (UTC)

---

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Fabrictramp | talk to me 01:46, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

• Keep and merge if appropriate. Per DGG but also, this (and others) was a real product that one could go to a shop and buy; I can see no reason why we should not cover it; the only question is whether it should be covered in a separate article or an article about the range of products. CIreland (talk) 05:19, 16 December 2008 (UTC)
• Delete and reject merge for the following reasons:
  • Merge discussions never ever seem to go anywhere. A vote to merge is a vote to keep it unchanged indefinitely, and that is not acceptable.
  • Unsourced material should be removed unless and until it can be sourced, not stashed away within other articles.
  • I don't see that any article would be improved by including this- most Zoids articles are bloated and overflowing with exactly this kind of cruft already.
  • Wikipedia is a lot of things but it is most certainly not a product catalogue for toy companies. Reyk _YO! 22:54, 16 December 2008 (UTC)
• Keep and merge Based on reasonable outcome for informative article with insufficient notability to stand apart from broader topic. ChildofMidnight (talk) 00:47, 17 December 2008 (UTC)
• Delete as clearly non-notable. Eusebeus (talk) 19:33, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

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.