Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Garnet (Jewelpet)

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 redirect to List of Jewelpets and Sweetspets. The keep arguments did not appear to based on guidelines. Consensus was to re-direct to the list page. (non-admin closure) Onel5969 ^{TT me} 23:18, 16 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Garnet (Jewelpet)

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

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

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

No indication of notability at all. ViperSnake151 Talk 19:01, 2 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Keep I dunno if you're immature or not, character based articles don't tend to follow similar rules unless they're SOURCED. Saying that an anime character doesn't need an article means you flat out said it shouldn't be included.--BlackGaia02 (talkpage if you dare) (talk) 23:45, 2 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Keep all - official mascots. Staszek Lem (talk) 23:57, 2 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: These are not reasons to keep. The problem is that the articles do not contain any indication of why they are notable enough to have their own article. ViperSnake151 Talk 00:29, 3 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect - Hahaha, I think we can simply move to the main article for now until a separate article can be made....whenever that may be. SwisterTwister talk 06:31, 7 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Japan-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:55, 7 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Anime and manga-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:55, 7 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:55, 7 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Games-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:55, 7 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to List of Jewelpets and Sweetspets. I am only seeing primary sources here, the first few references are those towards the two tv studios that made the anime adaptation. The genre specific references include the website of Jewelpet's company Sanrio, as well as another website [1] that when you scroll to the bottom you also see Sanrio. If that website isn't connected some way to the primary company then having the name www.jewelpet.jp sounds like a fan-site. Finally the further reading section include books made by the publisher of the books for the series. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 20:14, 7 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect. Unclear how independently notable these characters are. They should each get their own subsection at the top of the List of Jewelpets and Sweetspets as Main characters if they are the representative ones for the brand, instead of being buried in the list of 30+ characters. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 20:36, 7 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Natg 19 (talk) 22:57, 9 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete or redirect. Even an anime character must have authoritative proof of notability. --Rpclod (talk) 03:01, 10 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Character articles don't need any notability at all unless you can find a much more decent source from what: a reference book? Haha no. Because there's none and there are no other official references for them in any anime magazines. Redirecting them back to the main article will make the page bloated with data.--BlackGaia02 (talkpage if you dare) (talk) 04:50, 10 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note that voting twice is a no-no. --DAJF (talk) 11:49, 10 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, yes they do. Character lists are generally accepted for various reasons (although they don't have a free pass) but articles for individual characters should always show some notability. I would also suggest that if something isn't covered in an anime magazine, that suggests that something isn't notable, I'm not sure why you think that somehow makes it safe. At any rate, your reasoning is just plain wrong. Rpclod's point is as simple and accurate as you can get.SephyTheThird (talk) 20:48, 10 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Per request you could have this article userfied if you plan to work on it now or in the future. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 03:07, 11 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

It's gonna take time to import everything back. The article is feared to be bloated with data, so how do I suppose to keep those info intact when redirecting then? None. It's getting me nowhere!--BlackGaia02 (talkpage if you dare) (talk) 13:06, 12 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to List of Jewelpets and Sweetspets. None of the articles have in-depth third-party sourcing to indicate adequate independent notability. --DAJF (talk) 11:49, 10 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect as not independently notable.SephyTheThird (talk) 20:48, 10 October 2015 (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.