Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gouken (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 merge‎ to Characters of the Street Fighter series. Views seem roughly evenly split between Keep and Merge, but the latter are better anchored in guidelines. Owen× ☎ 23:21, 27 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Gouken[edit]

AfDs for this article:

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

Gouken, by *himself*, is not notable, and the most notability the character received was due to Sheng Long, a completely separate character that Capcom used the hoax about to promote Gouken's inclusion in Street Fighter IV, but has since included in a game as his own character, albeit an optional boss. Bringing that up because there was a lot of confusion over the matter during the previous AfD, including the weird suggestion of...merging Sheng Long into Gouken.

Now with that said, a source analysis of what was presented during the last AfD:

Play issue 217, which is more discussing the Sheng Long hoax, and is also factually incorrect: Gouken's look was defined in the manga Street Fighter II: Ryu, which came out years prior. Take that how you will.
A paper by Nicholas Ware, which by itself is a fine source, but only briefly discusses his design in comparison to Ryu and Ken. It should be pointed out that some mentions in the paper are not from Ware, but interviews he conducted of others for his research, and don't fall under the same attribution.
This from IGN and this from GameSpot which both discuss his gameplay, and were done for all the characters. If these counted towards notability, we would have articles on pretty much every Pokemon that was competitively viable.

So with that longwindedness out of the way, trying to do a further WP:BEFORE isn't turning up anything either. The main reason this character is known at all...is because of the notability of another character, and that isn't inherited. Take that away, and there's little to say about Gouken. Kung Fu Man (talk) 10:47, 13 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Fictional elements and Video games. Kung Fu Man (talk) 10:47, 13 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep The magazine, IGN and Gamespot sources alone are sufficient for SIGCOV. "Discussing a character's gameplay" is not a disqualifier and there's no Wikipedia rule against it. (WP:NOTGAMEGUIDE refers to articles, not sources). A character being notable due to another character is also not a disqualifier. It's not the same as "inherited" notability, which would be akin to saying that, let's say Gouken had a son who was totally non-notable, that character would be notable too. These are some weird assertions for something to be non-notable. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 13:21, 13 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The magazine article is primarily discussing Sheng Long, not Gouken. Gouken is discussed at the very end of it, and even then it's somehow *hilariously* managing to be incorrect? As for the IGN and Gamespot articles, I'm going to refer to the [AfD], where it was pointed out such gameplay reactions and discussions were done for all the characters, and not for the one character specifically. The issue isn't the gameplay focus per se over discussing him as a character, it's that every character got some degree of discussion on both sites from the game. Lastly your argument "A character being notable due to another character is also not a disqualifier" is more of a matter that, on its own merits, the character lacks discussion. One has to examine if the actual sources are discussing him, or the Sheng Long hoax that has he was created independently of.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 13:37, 13 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The idea that "it's incorrect" appears to be your own belief. The article is very much correct. There's a difference between a design being shown of Ryu's mentor, and the idea of Gouken as a playable character. While Ryu's mentor as a one-off design had already existed, Sheng Long spurred the developers to create a playable mentor character.

While Sheng Long may have been a separate character, Gouken is essentially the official version of Sheng Long and the two are intrinsically linked. I still think that Sheng Long should be merged into Gouken, regardless of the offhand dismissal of that idea here. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 13:57, 13 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
But the article is. It's claiming Gouken's appearance is based off Sheng Long's, when we have artbook sources that state otherwise. Additionally, Sheng Long is now an actual character in SF6, albeit as an optional boss. Long's impact was more on Akuma, but also EGM as detailed in that article, and has his own development history. Merging it into here makes no sense, nor would merging Gouken into Long's article.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 14:03, 13 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
WIRED also states that "Gouken began as Sheng Long" and that Capcom had been teasing that Sheng Long would become real before they introduced Gouken.

Though I guess that given that Sheng Long got a recent canonical appearance I wasn't aware of before [1] they should both probably have separate articles. Gouken was still clearly based in some manner on the character. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 14:25, 13 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge to the Street Fighter characters list. His notability seems almost entirely tied to Sheng Long, but a merge there is inappropriate, and Gouken is covered in enough at the Sheng Long article. There is some content worth adding to the character list, so I'd say there is appropriate, but there is nowhere near enough for a whole article here. Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 20:32, 13 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep – Per previous AfD. WP:GNG has been established, the character in question is old enough in the franchise to have WP:SIGCOV, regardless of if it started as hoax. It doesn't seem to me that there was any new fact to review the previous decision. Svartner (talk) 17:20, 14 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Svartner How old a character is in a franchise does not automatically guarantee SIGCOV. That's basically arguing WP:SOURCESMUSTEXIST.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 17:57, 14 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
They're arguing that the character is old enough to have gained SIGCOV, not that the character is notable because they are old. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 18:29, 14 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
To clarify, being in a franchise for a long time does not guarantee SIGCOV must exist, which seems to be their argument.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 18:40, 14 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That's still practically the same argument. Unless sources can be directly found and shown this is basically just a WP: SOURCESMUSTEXIST argument. Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 23:04, 14 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep as the sources show notability and that GNG has been met.DaniloDaysOfOurLives (talk) 16:03, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge. I am not at all opposed to game guide content if appropriate and significant coverage, but the notion of a rather short reception that is, from what I can see, exclusively about how he plays in Street Fighter, is to show no real-world notability. The reception suggests a character whose notability has zero reach outside of people who play Street Fighter. The reception section even seems to have content that provides very little real perspective on the character. One citation just says that he's powerful; one is a Valnet listicle that doesn't provide sigcov; and the other two are lists, one which the author literally says he's not memorable. For effect, let me demonstrate what his article looks like if you pare it down to actual sigcov:
Ryan Clements from IGN commented that Gouken is one of the best new characters from Street Fighter IV, recommending him highly due to his large number of combos and originality.[15] He has also been regarded as a powerful character, with Game Revolution reviewer Nick Tan criticizing his moves for being much stronger than those of many other characters, making evading them almost impossible.[16][17] Den of Geek ranked Gouken commented how Gouken differentiates himself from Ryu, Ken, and Akuma, making him "appear more masterful."[20]
Like, I'm sorry, but this is incredibly weak. The only angle seems to be that Sheng Long and Gouken are intrinsically linked, which I do not buy. As it is, with Gouken as a character separate from Sheng Long, his reception is almost entirely fluff. - Cukie Gherkin (talk) 16:01, 20 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: I'm finding the 'merge' arguments significantly more persuasive currently, relisting for seven days to see if consensus is established.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel (talk) 21:42, 20 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge Per source analysis above and possibly WP:TNT. I also felt like his notability were def tied to Sheng Long. GreenishPickle! (🔔) 00:02, 27 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge a short summary to Characters of the Street Fighter series: Fails GNG, fancruft. Nothing found with WP:SIGCOV addressing the subject directly and indepth from WP:IS WP:RS. // Timothy :: talk 19:45, 27 January 2024 (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.