Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Vengeful spirit
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- 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. StarM 23:39, 11 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Vengeful spirit (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)
Could not find a suitable CSD. Apparently nn-notable thing of DotA. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 07:56, 7 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Minor element/character of a video game mod. Only source given in the article is the the mod itself. Most of the vanilla-Google results ("Vengeful spirit" "Defense of the Ancients") are for fansites and forums, while Google News and Google Scholar come up with nothing. -- saberwyn 08:12, 7 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- In a related idea, I think that this particular article title should be redirected to an appropriate target dealing with ghosts, spirits, etc, which is a far more common use of the term. -- saberwyn 08:12, 7 November 2008 (UTC)
Don't let me stand in the way of a speedy deletion of this discussion.. -- saberwyn 08:15, 7 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]- Now that the AFD has been re-opened, I'm striking my striking. I am now confused. -- saberwyn 04:56, 8 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Hold the phone — why is this at AfD when it has already been proposed for deletion and not yet contested? I would recommend a speedy close and let the prod run its course. It can be renominated should the prod be contested. MuZemike (talk) 08:28, 7 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Reopened this was closed as a non-admin closure based on the above, but:. Bringing a prod here is essentially a removal of the prod, with placement of an afd instead, on the presumed grounds that it needs discussion. The accident of not removing the prod tag is incidental. This is not a comment on the merits of the article, which i need to think about further If it will make anyone happier about it, I've done as MuZemike asked, and removed the prod. It is appropriate to bring any article here instead that any wikipedian thinks should have a community opinion. DGG (talk) 04:50, 8 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment It was an accident. I didn't even noticed that that the PROD was there. Sorry. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 04:54, 8 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fictional characters-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 05:29, 8 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Game-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 05:29, 8 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Speedy Merge/Delete Every character in a video game does not an article make. ChildofMidnight (talk) 09:19, 8 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete per my prod. This is pretty clear game-guide material - there are dozens of heros in this game, but none of them have any spark of notability outside of the game. Given that they aren't even enumerated in the parent article, there's absolutely no reason to have separate articles for any of them. Zetawoof(ζ) 22:11, 8 November 2008 (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.