Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Clank (Ratchet & Clank)

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 merge‎ to Ratchet (Ratchet & Clank). Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:42, 18 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Clank (Ratchet & Clank)[edit]

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

Article's sourcing doesn't show any independent notability, and hasn't for a very long time. While the argument is being made that "the article was only recently tagged", WP:BEFORE doesn't turn up anything either depressingly enough and more commentary on the games themselves. There just isn't anything here. Kung Fu Man (talk) 21:27, 11 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. Kung Fu Man (talk) 21:30, 11 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Video games-related deletion discussions. Kung Fu Man (talk) 21:30, 11 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Ratchet (Ratchet & Clank) to form combined article Ratchet and Clank (characters). They are notable specifically as a duo since the games are essentially a buddy story, so it strikes me as weird they'd have separate articles. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 22:34, 11 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Honestly not a bad idea.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 23:24, 11 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, that's pretty solid. - Cukie Gherkin (talk) 04:14, 12 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Merge per Zx. By merging it at Ratchet (Ratchet & Clank) as a duo. GreenishPickle! (🔔) 10:35, 12 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Ratchet & Clank § Major characters. If the character duo is potentially independently notable then certainly they would be better covered in the existing character section, yes? The sourcing doesn't yet warrant a summary style split from that parent section. czar 03:11, 13 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- I mean, if the duo is independently notable, that would suggest it's fine to exist as its own article. - Cukie Gherkin (talk) 06:10, 13 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- If they are potentially independently notable, then it would be better covered in the existing character section of a parent article? That doesn't make any sense. Either they are notable in their own right as major characters of a work of fiction, or they are not. Haleth (talk) 09:48, 13 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  The main coverage of these characters are in context of the series and we have a series article with a Characters section. Absent sources that specifically show the character duo's independent notability from the series, summary style is a basic tenet of building out articles with overlapping content. If there was more sourcing that warranted mention in the series characters section, only then should a split be considered. czar 11:49, 14 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Merge with Ratchet (Ratchet & Clank) to form Ratchet and Clank (characters), assuming of course that Zxcvbnm as the original proposer or any other interested editor would implement the work.Haleth (talk) 09:47, 13 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I'm definitely interested in attempting it. Still, I don't think that it should be overturned if nobody tried to right away. The world would not implode if there was a merge tag on it for a while. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 19:58, 13 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Merge per above. SIGCOV is meh, not a single source cited is about the character, but they are about the game, and mention the characters in passing. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 05:42, 16 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Merge Both characters are highly related, and notable together. Shooterwalker (talk) 22:17, 16 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Ratchet (Ratchet & Clank).Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 09:01, 18 July 2023 (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.