Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Primon

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. -- Cirt (talk) 05:50, 4 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Primon[edit]

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

Topic is really obscure and likely not notable NotARealWord (talk) 22:47, 28 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - It's a young stub. Let someone develop it, don't abort it. Mathewignash (talk) 23:49, 28 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think that's a good reason. This is a really obscure character, even within Transformers. So delete. Please NotARealWord (talk) 01:08, 29 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comment If it's so obscure (and I admit it is), It should merge with and redirect to more general page, like Prime (Transformers). Mathewignash (talk) 01:46, 29 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - Merge doesn't sound too bad an option. NotARealWord (talk) 15:42, 29 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe merging is not so good. Simply delete considering how this character is (currently) so vague and not really well defined. NotARealWord (talk) 13:02, 1 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - Thanks for the ~~strange~~ retcon, the page "Primon" could be expanded rather than just being a short page. --TX55^TALK 16:30, 29 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - Article subject must be referenced in secondary sources to count as notable. Even on TFWiki, Primon is a rather vague character. NotARealWord (talk) 16:44, 29 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - I'm not saying using TFwiki as the source. I use the link to indicate the page has the potential for expandin. --TX55^TALK 06:27, 30 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

There's no sourced content, so there's nothing to merge, and if it's redirected it should redirect to the real-world primon gas. Reyk _YO! 23:28, 29 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 17:47, 29 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. If you want to send it to another wiki, do it, but this doesn't belong here. The line "it was never mentioned again in any other source" kind of sums up why this should be deleted... J Milburn (talk) 22:01, 29 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete- I've seen articles that fail to assert notability, but this is one of the few I can recall that explicitly claims non-notability. Reyk _YO! 23:10, 29 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Merge information to Prime (Transformers) Dream Focus 23:20, 29 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep or Merge information to Prime (Transformers). --TX55^TALK 06:27, 30 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Prime (Transformers) (or Merge if there is actually anything to merge, though there doesn't appear to be). Black Kite (t) (c) 13:52, 30 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: The article under discussion here has been flagged for {{rescue}} by the Article Rescue Squadron, with no explanation as to why this article should be rescued and how that could happen (per ARS instructions). SnottyWong ^spout 16:50, 30 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Prime (Transformers). I actually would have tagged this for speedy deletion A1. I can't even tell what this article is about. SnottyWong ^spout 16:50, 30 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete and STRONGLY oppose redirection to anything to do with Transformers. If anything it should redirect to primon gas. Having a researcher look up a valid physics topic and get a cartoon character instead (!!) is exactly the sort of thing that makes Wikipedia look, well, stupid. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 17:07, 30 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment Then a disambig page would be appropriate. Mathewignash (talk) 22:28, 30 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  - Comment Better to redirect "Primon" to "Primon gas", with a {{redirect}} hatnote there to point anyone looking for the Transformers usage to an appropriate article. PamD (talk) 19:17, 31 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think the hatnote is actually necessary, considering that it's "usage" within Transformers isn't really much of anything. !NotARealWord (talk) 22:18, 3 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Centralize discussion and merge and redirect as accordingly decided by Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Transformers centralized discussion. There are so many articles, surely some of them can be lumped. —CodeHydro 13:40, 31 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete No sourcing to establish notability, no real information.Slatersteven (talk) 20:03, 31 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Not enough to verifiable information to indicate this character qualifies for inclusion in the Wikipedia project. Inniverse (talk) 14:20, 1 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - If you look this topic up, there's not much information period. THis character is just that vague and obscure. NotARealWord (talk) 17:07, 2 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete lack of third party sources to WP:verify notability. Very inappropriate for redirect too. Shooterwalker (talk) 21:30, 2 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, and don't redirect because the term has other uses. Almost impossible to verify and a pretty unlikely search term. Alzarian16 (talk) 10:58, 3 September 2010 (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.