Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tem Ray

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_Universal_Century_characters. Black Kite 00:44, 18 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Tem Ray[edit]

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

Extremely minor character who plays little role in the overall plot. Not appropriate to merge. Prod with no given reason. —Farix (t | c) 02:51, 4 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Anime and manga-related deletion discussions. -- —Farix (t | c) 02:52, 4 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
merge or redirect. Every named character in a major fiction should be at least redirected to a suitable list. I agree that we do not want to have a multitude of individual articles, but it seems significant enough for content. Is there some particular reason why that would harm Wikipedia? DGG ( talk ) 03:08, 4 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I feel it would harm wikipedia, as less new articles are being made, and less editors are working on wiki. If a character is notable enough to be used in alot of things and such, like Ichigo from Tokyo Mew Mew it should merit it's own article - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 03:41, 4 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see anything that applys to this article. Removing or merging a non notable character most certainly is not harming wikipedia (on the contrary). All pages have to fulfil certain requirements (such as Notability), the nominated article does not fulfill them. Dandy Sephy (talk)

Delete and Redirect to List_of_Universal_Century_characters - Apparently Merge is not an appropriate vote in AfD debates, leaving me with no option but to argue Delete on the merits. No evidence or claim of independent notability is made in the article, so a stand-alone article is not warranted. - DustFormsWords (talk) 05:33, 4 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think there is a rule against voting merge in an AFD. To the best of my knowledge it is generally discouraged for a nominator creating an AFD for the purposes of a merge deabate (that belongs on the artice's talk page) and that they should only start one if they want the page deleted. I am not however aware of any rule stating that someone else cannot mention a potential merge target if they think there is one the nominator may have missed.--76.71.215.85 (talk) 03:29, 5 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, I'm pretty merge is a very valid "vote". While proposing a article for AFD purely for merging is clearly inappropriate, people wanting to merge the content to another article are free to "vote" so. Preferably while providing a reason. Dandy Sephy (talk) 19:47, 10 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, JForget 23:08, 10 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Merge. Not very much content there. (And merge has always been a valid xFD suggestion.) --Gwern (contribs) 16:51 14 November 2009 (GMT)
Comment: I oppose a merge on the grounds that it would be a merge in name only. Other than that keep or delete as you please. -- allen四names 03:25, 17 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to List_of_Universal_Century_characters. Edward321 (talk) 15:28, 17 November 2009 (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.