Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Axer (Transformers)

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 to List of Decepticons. (non-admin closure) ♪ ♫ Wifione ♫ ♪ _―Œ^{♣Łeave Ξ мessage♣} 04:57, 8 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Axer (Transformers)[edit]

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

Subject is not notable enough to warrant it's own article. Delete. NotARealWord (talk) 13:27, 1 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Selectively merge the supported content to an appropriate page such as Transformers (toy line). Cnilep (talk) 17:45, 1 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Merge back to List of Decepticons. Mathewignash (talk) 23:41, 1 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 00:05, 2 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Merge for the sake of building a consensus. No sources to WP:verify notability which would be appropriate for deletion... but willing to go along with merge. Shooterwalker (talk) 15:24, 5 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comment -Do we really need a redirect for such a minor character? NotARealWord (talk) 20:16, 5 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

- Not really. But I'm trying to build a consensus. I'd support a merge, redirect, or deletion. This is clearly not appropriate for an article. Shooterwalker (talk) 22:50, 6 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comment- If you think a redirect isn't needed, shouldn't you vote for deletion? NotARealWord (talk) 13:48, 7 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Wikipedia is not a democracy. Voting achieves nothing. I'm here to build a consensus. So yes I'd support deletion. But I see a growing consensus for a merge. Shooterwalker (talk) 20:55, 7 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete unless merged. Not seeing any great need for a redirect unless it is needed for copyright reasons... J Milburn (talk) 23:11, 6 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to the best option above...redirects are cheap, no reason not to have one. CTJF83 chat 23:19, 7 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.