Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Pokémon by name

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 keep. Mailer Diablo 16:32, 22 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

List of Pokémon by name

Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information; listcruft. All the article contains is an alphabetical list of Pokemon (Pokemen?) in both the English and Japanese languages. There is no encyclopedic nature to the article hoopydink^{Conas tá tú?} 18:21, 14 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

keep it has alot of useful information, and it is easier to look up a Pokemon. (70.113.5.108 18:36, 14 July 2006 (UTC))[reply]
Keep. I ran into the page at the request of my two younger siblings who asked to look for the Japanese names of certain Pokémon. I don't really consider it indiscriminate since it has a lot of relevance to the Pokémon articles here. This list of chracters is similar to other useful ones such as List of characters in Transformers comics, List of characters in the Harry Potter books, List of DC Comics characters, List of Marvel Comics characters, List of characters from The Simpsons, List of Star Trek characters, ad infinitum (nauseam?). --Chris S. 06:22, 15 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep and tag it with {{Disambig}} M inun ^(Spiderman) 10:15, 15 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Highway ^Batman! 16:26, 15 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- When voting keep, you should provide a reason, this will help administrators understand when they close the discussions, cheers M inun ^(Spiderman) 21:32, 15 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  - In that case, where's your reason? ;-) --Chris S. 21:36, 15 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    - I said we should tag it with {{Disambig}} M inun ^(Spiderman) 08:30, 16 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
      - But that's a suggestion, not a reason. heh. --Chris S. 09:01, 16 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This AfD nomination was incomplete. It is listed now. DumbBOT 13:57, 17 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Japan-related deletions. -- TheFarix (Talk) 14:10, 17 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep useful for looking up Pokemon. Park3r 18:21, 17 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comment How does this list differ from List of Basic Pokémon, List of Pokémon by stage, List of Stage 1 Pokémon, List of Stage 2 Pokémon, List of Pokémon by National Pokédex number, List of Pokémon by Johto Pokédex number, List of Pokémon by Hoenn Pokédex number, and List of Basic Pokémon? Could we possibly merge all of these lists into one list entitled List of Pokémon? It seems to me that all these lists are quite redundant of eachother. hoopydink^{Conas tá tú?} 18:50, 17 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete lists of non-notable things are not encyclopedic. Carlossuarez46 20:26, 17 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete all but List of Pokémon by stage as indiscriminate collections. I'm sure all the other orderings are useful when you're playing the game, but not useful to an encyclopedia reader. Gamefaqs and pokemon wikis exist for the former. - Wickning1 20:34, 17 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep and merge per Hoopydink Jcuk 20:35, 17 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Merge All lists of Pokemon to List of Pokémon and make it a disambiguation page.--Nick Y. 20:36, 17 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Comment No need to merge imo, List of Pokémon by stage is all the info we need. Perhaps move its contents to List of Pokemon. - Wickning1 20:55, 17 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Keep for reasons stated above, though I agree that some consensus should be made regarding all of the lists mentioned above. --Sonic Mew 22:54, 17 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

And while not relevant to the discussion, I had to smile at "Pokemen". ;-) --Sonic Mew 22:56, 17 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Reluctant keep. Sadly, we have articles on all the Pokémon, so this would technically be a useful list. --Core des at talk. o.o;; 05:21, 18 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep for now, but there really needs to be a discussion about the future of these lists; I suspect several of them are redundant and could be merged together. BryanG^(talk) 04:55, 19 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. No different from any other list of characters from a game. Plus, this is long enough, isn't it? Toastypk 18:14, 20 July 2006 (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.