Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Giant animal (fiction)

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, which is dedicated to User:Bishzilla _ROARR!! El_C 20:55, 31 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Giant animal (fiction)[edit]

WP:NOT loosely associated topics (just a list of animals and species in fiction that happen to be big), and original research (attempting to define "Giant animal" as if it's some kind of known term in fiction.) Saikokira 00:11, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Lists or repositories of loosely associated topics are not appropriate for Wikipedia. Very subjective, as well; "giant," in this usage, is a relative term. —Travis ^talk 00:45, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Loosely associated topics Corpx 02:48, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Wikipedia is not a list of loosely associated topics. Half of the article consists of a huge list of half the Pokémon. Bart133 ^{(t) (c)} 04:19, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't "Giant Pokémon" an oxymoron? —Travis ^talk 01:35, 30 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per above. Iotha 05:29, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Per nominator and per above. Wikidudeman ^(talk) 15:15, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per Wikidudeman. Tim^{speak} 17:49, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete A list of giant Pokemons is not made more intelligent by throwing in a reference to Moby Dick. Mandsford 01:14, 30 July 2007 (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.