Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/'M

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 of the debate was Merge. I am so not into Pokémon I'm having a hard time understanding all of this, but it seems clear that the consensus is to merge all of the glitch articles ('M, Missingno. and 3trainerpoké, plus any others that I may not be aware of) into a single new article called something like Glitch Pokémon. All the individual article names should remain as redirects to that new article. I'll leave it to User:A Man In Black to do the actual merging, and just monitor the situation to make sure it happens, since I don't understand the subject well enough to perform the merge myself. --RoySmith 01:24, 2 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

'M[edit]

A mere glitch in the form of only 2 characters does not merit it's own article!

Delete, or merge to a Nintendo-related article if prudent. Glitchcruft! --Nintendude 00:31, 26 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

merge with either the Missingno article or merge both with a broader glitch-related article.--||bass 19:13, 26 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Missingno., as it's actually the same glitch. This has been on my list of stuff to merge for a while now; I just haven't gotten around to it. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 02:05, 26 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. If consensus holds that it is, in fact, the same glitch (and I'm not so sure), go ahead and merge with Missingno.. Don't delete, by any means, as the "glitch pokémon" are more notable than at least a third of the real ones. — FREAK OF NUR_xTURE (TALK) 02:29, 26 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Ouchy at the title, that is one horrible title for an article, but I say merge per A Man In Black. NSLE _{(讨论+extra)} 08:19, 26 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Merge per A Man In Black. -LichYoshi 09:56, 26 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Merge per A Man in Black. Failing that, keep it but cut it way down. Jacqui ^★ 14:43, 26 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Merge with Missingno, and get rid of all those stupid images every time its name is mentioned. Just refer to it as 'M for goodness sake. the wub "?!" 16:06, 26 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Keep or merge with Missingno.. Keep in mind that they aren't the same glitch. 'M evolves into Kangaskhan, whereas Missingno. doesn't. 'M also produces slightly different effects, while in transfer to other games, to Missingno. --Apostrophe 00:12, 27 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Missingno. as suggested. I think the glitch Pokémons aren't really notable enough to have individual articles, while the topic itself is definitely valid; perhaps it would be just neat to merge them all into one big article. --wwwwolf (barks/growls) 02:28, 27 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
It is highly unencyclopedic to have an article solely devoted to a single specific bug in a videogame. It screams of gamecruft. --||bass 03:33, 28 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Keep
1. If this "mere glitch" doesn't warrant its own article, then how come Missingno. and 3trainerpoké aren't nominated for deletion?
- - A good question indeed. Consider them nominated for merger as well. Giving a distinct article to a single glitch in a single game is gamecruft at its worst. --||bass 05:43, 28 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
1. There are differences between 'M, Missingno. and 3trainerpoké, per Apostrophe.
However, if it should come to it, then merge the three into one single article, say, Glitch Pokémon. --JB Adder | Talk 05:11, 28 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The above two points were made by the same author. --JB Adder | Talk 05:12, 28 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

- I actually like the idea of the merger of all three into a single "Glitch Pokemon" article. Leaving the pages for any specific glitch pokemon as redirects to the general glitch pokemon page. --||bass 17:37, 28 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - If the consensus is to close this article as merge, someone drop me a line and I'll take care of the merger (which will include 3trainerpoké). - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 22:31, 28 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Every Pokémon has an article, this is more notable than Wurmple, Spinda, and Cacnea put together. Keep. Stifle 23:25, 28 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Maybe that says more about every pokemon having an article then it does about giving an article to a relatively minor bug in a peice of game software. --||bass 16:52, 29 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Merge per A Man in Black. --InShaneee 21:08, 29 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep very interesting. Zordrac 13:18, 1 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

A Man in Black (an admin if some if you didn't know) is already planning to merge this and the other glitch articles into a single page.

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.