Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Zordon (3rd nomination)

The printable version is no longer supported and may have rendering errors. Please update your browser bookmarks and please use the default browser print function instead.

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 keep. Spartaz ^Humbug! 07:12, 3 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Zordon

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Article is mostly plot and there is nothing notable about this character, similar to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ashley Hammond and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Aisha Campbell The Legendary Ranger (talk) 13:31, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2020 May 18. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 13:49, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Comics and animation-related deletion discussions. Toughpigs (talk) 18:54, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Science fiction and fantasy-related deletion discussions. Toughpigs (talk) 18:54, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. Toughpigs (talk) 18:54, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete there is a total lack of 3rd-arty sources showing in depth coverage.John Pack Lambert (talk) 18:38, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: I'm surprised that the nomination doesn't acknowledge the 2016 Entertainment Weekly article and the 2017 Entertainment Tonight coverage currently cited in the article. This is independent, third-party coverage that is specifically about this character. The EW article is called "Power Rangers movie: Bryan Cranston teases Zordon character details", which implies that the magazine considers Zordon to be well-known enough that a casual reader would recognize the name in the headline. — Toughpigs (talk) 18:59, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Power Rangers, the sources provided by Toughpigs are nothing more than passing mentions, being mostly focused around the actor with a few sentence-long in-universe mentions. The other secondary sources in this article are the same, passing mentions of the character in an article mostly devoted to other things. As a result this subject fails GNG. It also fails WP:PLOT, since it is written from an entirely in-universe point of view, meaning there is nothing to merge. Devonian Wombat (talk) 00:38, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to a list of PR characters or such. The EW coverage Touhpigs mentions is sadly rather short on the character itself, and really, all it allows us to say is that Zordon was played by this actor in a movie. This is not enough, and the articles by no means contain any in-depth analysis of the film version of the character. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 01:14, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as notable per the following sources:

Thanks, Erik (talk | contrib) ^{(ping me)} 16:00, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Power Rangers#Premise as non-notable. I still don't see WP:SIGCOV - in the sources given as examples, the character is largely mentioned in passing in the context of something else._{ZXCVBNM (TALK)} 18:31, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Per WP:SIGCOV, "Significant coverage is more than a trivial mention, but it does not need to be the main topic of the source material." The sources definitely did not mention Zordon trivially. There are numerous real-world characteristics ascribed to the figure. Erik (talk | contrib) ^{(ping me)} 21:03, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: The snippets that I can see from Kinderculture: The Corporate Construction Of Childhood are obviously not passing mentions. The snippet from page 124 says:

"...reacts to Zordon's instructions with an unquestioning acceptance of presumably life-threatening missions. It's the perfect image of melting-pot consensus leading to coordinated action on behalf of social justice and the "American way of life". The extraterrestrial nature of Zordon, who is often revealed as a computer-generated image..."

This is an academic book discussing the impact of corporate values on American children, and for at least a couple of pages it talks specifically about how the character of Zordon is constructed in order to further those corporate aims. It is not an episode guide or a plot rehash; it discusses the nature of Zordon as a symbolic representation. I believe that the SIGCOV concerns are easily met. — Toughpigs (talk) 19:13, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per WP:SIGCOV. To me, the sources provided are more than trivial, and do establish notability for the character. Rhino131 (talk) 14:34, 21 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Spartaz ^Humbug! 22:17, 26 May 2020 (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.