Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Caine (World of Darkness)

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. There is a clear consensus to delete. In addition, the arguments favoring deletion were based on established guidelines, such as WP:NOTABILITY, while some of the arguments in favor of keeping the article appear to be based on the misconception explained at WP:INHERITED. PhilKnight (talk) 19:23, 9 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Caine (World of Darkness)

There are no independent references to demonstrate notability of this fictional character. 99% of this material is in-universe and, while this is not a reason for deletion, once this in-universe material is deleted, there is nothing left except that "Caine is a fictional vampire who is based on the biblical story of Caine" with no evidence of notability for this character. --Craw-daddy | T | 19:43, 4 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Game-related deletion discussions. —--Craw-daddy | T | 19:43, 4 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been added to the list of video game related deletions. MuZemike (talk) 20:09, 4 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Zero assertion of notability through reliable sources. Judgesurreal777 (talk) 20:18, 4 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
weak keep or merge The game itself is monumentally notable, and while I realize that doesn't confer notability by extension, the mythology of the world has been both used by other people for other purposes (for good or ill) and has had significant cultural impact through influence on other genre works, if they can give more substantial information and a better write-up, then it should be kept. Perhaps this is one place where the long-beaten pokemon analogy truly holds. 69.210.48.138 (talk) 20:53, 4 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. No notability is shown. RobJ1981 (talk) 23:43, 4 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Everything therein is all original research and in-universe, with absolutely zero sources. Then there's the matter of the long "Speculation" section. Beemer69 ^chitchat 23:56, 4 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Keep rewrite and source. An integral part of the fictional universe whose notability is established through the "real" version of the person. Trimming down to the introduction would remove most of the inuniverse stuff. I'm reasonably sure that independent coverage exists historically (if only from the various religious groups that objected to his use in the game). Jasynnash2 (talk) 10:14, 5 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - no assertion of notability through non-trivial coverage by reliable sources independent of the topic. The entire article is excessive plot summary, and a big chunk of that is original research. sephiroth bcr ^(converse) 00:11, 7 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. This is an article about a fictional character, but one who has been a large part of a large number of notable works, as part of the World of Darkness, probably one of the top 3 role-playing games. In that way it is comparable to articles about other fictional characters, which we have plenty of, for example Category:Forgotten Realms characters has 30 of them, Category:Video game characters has about a hundred, etc. A number of the WoD games and publications are outright named after this character, for example Sword of Caine, Caine's Chosen, etc. Reviews of the game cover Caine's story, non-trivially, as part of covering the World of Darkness, for example. This is a justifiable sub-article of the World of Darkness article. --GRuban (talk) 18:31, 8 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
By the way, since when do we have to delete all the in-universe information about fictional characters? What would the Bilbo Baggins or Harry Potter (character) articles be without in-universe information? That doesn't mean we shouldn't get rid of original research, and shouldn't add more about the importance of the character to real-world publication histories, but we can certainly keep a summary of the importance of the character to the universe. --GRuban (talk) 18:37, 8 August 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.