Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of kaiju

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 no consensus. Spartaz ^Humbug! 16:38, 8 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

List of kaiju[edit]

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

Article is just a plain list of kaiju without any links or description. See WP:DIRECTORY. Notable kaiju can have their own pages (e.g. Godzilla and Mothra) and Category:Kaiju can be used to organize them. There's no need for an article to do what a category already does. Zachlipton (talk) 19:40, 23 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Lists and categories are complementary. Less notable kaiju without articles yet, such as Take-majin, can't be handled by a category. The list just needs to be linked and described. Clarityfiend (talk) 21:33, 23 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 02:26, 24 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 02:26, 24 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. The list is currently devoid of context or sources. I am not going to make a recommendation yet because I suspect someone may in fact add the context and sources before the AfD period is over, but that definitely needs to be done if this article is going to be kept. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 06:07, 24 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. This list is not useful as a bare list of names with no context, sources, or descriptions. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 14:24, 29 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 01:11, 30 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep : Yes, it's abysmal but it just needs love and editing, and if we can solve by editing, we don't delete, per deletion policy. Almost every article, especially in the past, started as an ugly duckling. Killing them in the nest is not the way to improve. That said, I see no policy/guideline reason to delete this list. --Cyclopia ^talk 01:29, 7 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:CSD#A1. The article lacks sufficient context to identify the subject of the article. It does not make clear what a kaiju is. Sandstein 10:21, 7 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

WP:CSD#A1 applies only to very short articles - in any case adding context is trivial, I'm doing it right now. --Cyclopia ^talk 13:21, 7 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comment : I have refactored about ~50% of the list, linking entries and providing context and links to further related lists.--Cyclopia ^talk 13:47, 7 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as per nom. -- P 1 9 9 • TALK 22:17, 7 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Keep in its current form, there is context, and the original rationale for deletion no longer applies. Lists and categories are complementary, see WP:LISTPURP#Lists and categories. Not the world's greatest content, but then that's not a requirement to be here. Xymmax ^{So let it be written} _{So let it be done} 12:32, 8 January 2011 (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.