Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Three Great Powers

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 KEEP (no consensus). Larry V (talk | contribs) 00:02, 28 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The Three Great Powers[edit]

Bump from speedy. Neutral. —Quarl ^(talk) 2006-12-18 09:35Z

The article should be kept because the topic is from a major fictional universe, but clearly this article needs to be reorganized in some way to mesh with the One Piece series of articles. I would (AFD propose) Merge to One Piece so that Talk:One Piece could sort it out. hateless
'Merge to One Piece. SkierRMH 00:41, 19 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
keep - More and more info will be revealed in the manga and anime, and this is where it should go. - Peregrinefisher 19:14, 20 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Anime and manga-related deletions. -- TheFarix (Talk) 15:33, 22 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comment normally I'd say delete, but holy crap look how many freaking One Piece articles there are... I'm just going to pretend like I didn't see that... and go on my way.. -- Ned Scott 07:07, 23 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Reply: You haven't seen the Mortal Kombat pages then I take it. This is nothing compared to that. There is a lot of info people want to talk about on certain topics I guess, I'm saying that for all the fictional universe base Wikipedia pages, not just One Piece ones. Even the Donkey Kong games have expanded like the One Piece pages. Angel Emfrbl 19:36, 27 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete We have articles for each of the entries on this page already. This page was made without being discussed by everyone working on theOne Piece pages. We have enough One Piece pages without ones for trivial things like this. Those other paes that contain the info for this go into things a lot better then this page, this page seems to be designed to be a short summery page nothing else. Bottom line - the page is uneeded reguardless. Angel Emfrbl 19:34, 27 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete and evaluate a lot more.. we got some clean up ahead of us. -- Ned Scott 19:57, 27 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nomination --Mhking 19:58, 27 December 2006 (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.