Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Altair(Assasin's Creed)

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. east.718 at 08:48, February 1, 2008

Altair (Assasin's Creed)[edit]

An article on this character was already reviewed and deleted previously, this version faces the same issues of lacking notability (and being aware of the game, I have not seen any information to support notability) MASEM 02:04, 20 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete regretfully. I'm surprised that fans can't stick together a decent article for Altair, but judging by this rubbish, they can't. Not notable, information about Altair should just be put in the Assassin's Creed article. Cream147 _{Shout at me for doing wrong} 02:18, 20 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy delete per G4. Isn't that what this speedy delete criteria is for, or does it have to be identical text? eaolson (talk) 02:51, 20 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- I checked the pre-deletion version of the other article, and while the text covers the same concepts, it's not a copy. G4 could apply, but only in a stretch, but rather go through the right channels to make sure. --MASEM 02:54, 20 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fictional characters-related deletion discussions. -- -- pb30<talk> 04:48, 20 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy delete as WP:CSD#G4. And even if that weren't true, it's WP:FANCRUFT. — HelloAnnyong ^{(say whaaat?!)} 04:48, 20 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy Delete if this article was deleted before, and a new article pops in, and isn't as notable like the first article, then why does it exist? Talk! 16:41, 23 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been added to the list of video game deletions. Someone another 10:13, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Yamamoto Ichiro 会話 03:12, 26 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please note significant changes has been made to the article since the nomination. Yamamoto Ichiro 会話 03:12, 26 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Alright, I have done what I can with the article. At the least, it now distinctions between fact and fiction. The finding of reliable references has been difficult; while there seems to be a lot of coverage, reliable ones are proving to be more rare. I have done what I can, but appreciate any help anyone else can offer. Also, I have never played this game, so my actual knowledge of it is limited. I did my best to maintain the original author's message, though. SorryGuy Talk 03:29, 26 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Still delete - references include nothing resembling significant, reliable, independent coverage. The videogamer.com article is close, but still essentially a press release. This is nothing that can't be included in the Assassin's Creed article. Marasmusine (talk) 13:36, 26 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keep rewritten article. An good example of what fictional character articles should be like. Assassin's Creed is quite a long article, it seems reasonable to split this off. the wub "?!" 13:43, 26 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

- Comment Altair is now a part of two games. Merging into Assassin's Creed is problematic because you then change the article to refer to the series of games rather than the specific game on the XBOX360 and PS3. As such, I would suggest either making an article on the series and merging information on Altair or keeping this article. --Anon 67.187.38.109 (talk) 17:47, 26 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  - There's no reason why the DS game (the second game) cannot provide a see also link to the Assassin's Creed page where the character info is located; there's no need for a separate character article with this little secondary information provided. --MASEM 02:27, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - If this information isn't important enough to be included in any of the relevant game articles (its not like he's been around for many game/media iterations like Mario or even Master Chief), than I don't see the need for an entirely new article for it. I would have no opposition to merging this information if people feel that its relevant for the game(s) articles. Wickethewok (talk) 05:57, 27 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Easily covered in the game articles, no need for a separate article. Pagra shtak 17:32, 27 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Merge into a character sub-article. Well, there just above we have two incompatible opposite reasons for deletion. Not knowing the game at all, I'd suggest what I usually do, a list of characters with a paragraph or two about each of the major characters, and a sentence or two about the minor ones. Then we can stop these endless AFds, and just write the best content, wherever it is that we put it. DGG (talk) 02:18, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- The problem is is that while there are other characters in the game, the amount of detail for these characters are practically nil as to make a list rather difficult to create. This is a case where there's no need to make a summary style list of characters because they can be adequetly covered in the main article (as particularly it's nowhere near SIZE issues. --MASEM 02:27, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per others. Nothing I could add that hasn't already been said. Doctorfluffy (talk) 17:23, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep or merge and redirect without deleting. Notable character in a notable game for which video game magazines can be used as reliable second party sources. Sincerely, --Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles^Tally-ho! 02:04, 31 January 2008 (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.