Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ciara (Bratz character)

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. - Mailer Diablo 07:36, 27 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ciara (Bratz character)

One of a series of daughter pages about a doll in a set (already covered in detail in the main Bratz article), which differ from each other only in trivial, non-encyclopedic details. The originator of the set of daughter articles has requested that they should not be remerged into the main Bratz article. While the set of dolls may meet WP:CORP 'Criteria for products and services', the individual dolls do not appear to. Bringing this to AfD as a test case for the whole series of daughter pages, and in an attempt to establish a precedent for similar sets of consumer items. Espresso Addict 23:04, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete and related per nom ST47 23:26, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete we have absoloutely no need for these pages, keep it in the main article. Viridae ^Talk 23:39, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete From WP:CORP, For instance, if a company has twenty different models of cell phone, and there is little difference between them, then compiling a single article for all of them would help readers in spotting the differences and similarities. The same should apply to different types of dolls with trivial differences. JChap2007 23:56, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom and WP:CORP. wikipediatrix 00:01, 23 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per JChap2007. Yomangani ^talk 00:00, 23 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I'm the one who started those pages. The big problem with this whole thing is the main article was being cluttered with descriptions which weren't even completely accurate (and in some cases, downright false). Some of the characters, such as Ciara here, are certainly less significant - but it would be inconsistant to make pages for some characters and not others. Maybe a better solution would be to make the article List of Bratz characters? I've seen similar character list pages in regards to other topics. It would allow more information space (and subsequently more accuracy) per character, while keeping the clutter out of the main article. What do you guys think? Alcy 00:14, 23 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have to admit, I'm unfamiliar with this area, but I'm not sure why a simple list of the characters' major features couldn't be squeezed back into the main Bratz article; a lot of the material in the subpages (eg which characters could swap shoes) seems to me to be essentially unimportant for an encyclopedia, and the Bratz article itself might benefit from a bit of a prune to focus on the cultural/societal significance of the dolls rather than just facts about their characteristics. Someone familiar with the area could patrol the resulting section to make sure it remained accurate. However, one big list containing all the characters would certainly seem preferable to the current plethora of mini-articles. Espresso Addict 00:35, 23 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

There are so many names that it might be beneficial to move them all to a separate page anyway. The main article is just getting so long. Yeah, it probably isn't necessary to have every edition listed, and I'm surprised someone added in the official character biographies. I don't know though, I think the shoe information is pretty useful. Since the dolls don't have feet (besides snap-on pairs), if a shoe is lost, the doll is missing a foot. These listings could be helpful to kids or casual collectors who might only have one doll and be unsure what shoes will match. At any rate, I think descriptions of each character (not too extensive, but long enough to include some detail and allow for a mention of variations) is a good idea - people might look to Wikipedia when they want help identifying what they have. It might even work in the main article with a simple format change (make it more like the character list on the Nana page, for example). Right now, it's really disorganized.Alcy 01:18, 23 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Also, do you think characters which have been the specific subject of controversy merit their own articles (such as May Lin, which was deemed racially offensive, or Kiana, discontinued due to a trademark Mattel held on a similar name)?Alcy 00:23, 23 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Such information seems more interesting to a general audience, but would still seem to me to fit better within the main article to allow casual readers, who probably wouldn't think to look up the individual dolls' names, easy access to the controversial information. Espresso Addict 00:59, 23 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I spotted one of these articles during a Special:Recentchanges run, and wondered why they had not been prod'ded yet. They appeared to have standing, but I knew I'd vote delete if an AfD came up. And it did, and here I am. Danny Lilithborne 01:31, 23 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Strong Keep Bratz dolls are one of the most popular dolls. Believe it or not some people do need to know information about different Bratz dolls

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.