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.
Barkeep49 (
talk) 21:43, 7 August 2020 (UTC)reply
Persistent vandalism from several Indonesian IP addresses, no clarified source material, page neglect, and most of the information could have served a better purpose on the main
Wangan Midnight page.
FlynnR13 (
talk) 23:15, 29 July 2020 (UTC)reply
Delete, and integrate into main
Wangan Midnight page - Abundance of unsourced/dubiously-sourced content. Furthermore, the article is written in a non-encyclopedic style (
WP:GAMEGUIDE and
WP:NOTPLOT).
User:FlynnR13 brings up a good point - a short character list, focusing on just the main series characters with short descriptions, would be adequate, and could be kept on the main
Wangan Midnight page. Such a section already exists on the main page and could edited to improve its quality. It is worth noting that precedent for deletion exists, with the similar case of
WP:AFD/List_of_Initial_D_Characters. --
2DKomplex (
talk) 12:47, 31 July 2020 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: Not clear if the second participant is advocating delete or merge (merge and delete isn't a good option see
WP:MAD)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Barkeep49 (
talk) 01:11, 7 August 2020 (UTC)reply
Delete due to being un-sourced and being mostly plot. Normally I'd go for merging, but I don't think it's a good idea in this case. Since the content isn't sourced. Someone can easily recreate what's worth including in the main article once sources appear if they do without all the plot stuff anyway. --
Adamant1 (
talk) 01:26, 7 August 2020 (UTC)reply
Delete. In light of the comments above, I withdraw my proposal to merge the article in question with its main page, and we should simply delete the article instead. Given the article's issues with unsourced content, poor style and fancruft, merger is inappropriate. --
2DKomplex (
talk) 14:10, 7 August 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.