Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/One Piece anime (English adaptation)

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 from One Piece manga (English version). W.marsh 22:23, 31 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

One Piece anime (English adaptation)

Almost entirely original research with few sources cited. --Farix (Talk) 03:26, 24 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Related One Piece discussions:

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/One Piece manga (English version)
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Post-Enies Lobby arc (AKA One Piece plot summaries)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Anime and manga-related deletions. -- Farix (Talk) 03:27, 24 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Christ, the dub was bad but it wasn't bad enough to be a seperate entity. --tjstrf talk 03:35, 24 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete- Not really necessary is it?--SUIT⁴² 03:55, 24 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Merge: I wanted One Piece manga (English version) merged with the Manga adaptions page but no one was prepared to discuss that motive... The alternative option was we could merge it back with the main page (though it will have to be broken down because there is too much info). I'd rather see a merge then a deletetion on this info. Angel Emfrbl 08:51, 24 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Merge with One Piece manga (English version), but rename to One Piece (English version) or One Piece (English adaptation). Matty-chan 03:26, 25 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, but trim, or merge to original article. The article is most definitely not original research: it appear quite verifiable to me, as anyone can compare two images. However, there is surely some unverifiable material which should be removed. Also, I would suggest to the Wikipedians above to not use WP:IDONTLIKEIT arguments. "Not really necessary" is not grounds for deletion. *Dark•Shikari^[T] 14:28, 24 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
If it is verifiable, it needs to have third-party citations from reliable sources. However, if it is just the editor comparing two images, then it's original research. --Farix (Talk) 22:43, 24 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, here's an idea; merge all salvagable and verifiable content into the main One Piece article under the heading 'controversial English translation'? -Toptomcat 00:34, 25 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
MERGE per Matty-chan and Dark Shikari, but merge the information into one "One Piece English adaptations" page; that page would be easily verifiable. Cough cough (Justyn 19:38, 25 January 2007 (UTC))[reply]
For both of these "English version" articles I think they should at least be merged together into one page, if not merged into a smaller section in the main article. FredOrAlive 17:48, 27 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Merge. Per Justyn. Jerry lavoie 23:30, 29 January 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.