Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Seasarmon (2nd nomination)

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 redirect to List of Digimon. JohnCD (talk) 20:22, 6 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Seasarmon[edit]

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

Utterly non-notable subject; no reliable sources cited. The article is filled with game-guide type material, and there seems to be no real-world significance. A prod was not possible because of an earlier nomination. J Milburn (talk) 18:10, 23 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:18, 24 January 2012 (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) 01:02, 30 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to List of Digimon. Previous AfD was a pretty dodgy close, if you ask me; looks more a like "no consensus", veering towards "delete". Mind you, it was a long time ago, I daresay the guidelines were different back then. Now, however, they are made of sterner stuff, and this totally fails the current incarnation of WP:GNG. Yunshui 雲‍水 14:13, 30 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete/redirect to list of Digimon. Agree that it's impossible for this to meet the WP:GNG. Shooterwalker (talk) 18:20, 4 February 2012 (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.