237:
this can be sourced from the work itself, & so there is no objection to merging. NOT PLOT is disputed policy, and in there is no agreement that it means anything more than that the total
Knowledge coverage of a fiction in general can not be entirely plot. And any article can potentially be improved. there is never a single case in Knowledge where the last sentence of this deletion nomination is applicable. All the other things cited here are
254:
a discussion on any policy talk page and justify placing a "disputed" tag on the policy, but that doesn't invalidate it. This article is nothing but plot summary, with zero references or real-world context, and the article on the film already has a concise plot summary. Where there is no useful, referenced content, there can be nothing to merge, particularly when what little plot info might be merged is
253:
The whole "NOT#PLOT is a disputed policy" argument is completely hollow, because every time the policy gets challenged it is overwhelmingly upheld. All the "disputes" over it in the last couple of years have not even resulted in a change in wording, so it clearly has widespread consensus. I can start
236:
and discuss necessary merge at the proper place. No reason is given why merge is unsatisfactory & almost none of t he arguments given here are even relevant to why there should be a deletion rather than a merge or redirect. I totally agree it is not worth a stand-alone article. But material like
280:
Current wording is" "A concise plot summary is appropriate as part of the larger coverage of a fictional work." I see the current wording as primarily inclusive: there must be coverage of the plot, and, it must be concise (but that's a relative term).
353:, (pity there's no "list of Godzilla monsters", or is there?). Wow there's a few of these Godzilla AFDs, this article is entirely made up of Original Research, if you "trimmed/improved" all the Original Research you'd have one line left.
219:. It is highly unlikely that sufficient secondary source material exists to support an independent article. None of the content is mergeable elsewhere as it is entirely unreferenced and is just plot summary. --
422:
to character list and/or main work article as appropriate. Redirecting is preferable in these cases to outright deletion because it directs other editors to add information to the
120:
211:, particularly without secondary sources to show notability. There are no sources here nor any assertion of notability, so it is unlikely that this could pass
308:
203:. Fictional creatures that only appear in 1 work (in this case 1 film, discounting the tie-in video games) do not generally pass the criteria of
169:- there is no call for an article on this creature because it has no significant real-world impact and devoting an article to it would be
258:
in the target. I'm all in favor of merging in cases where there is information worth salvaging, but there is no such content here. --
17:
437:
450:, whichever is more appropriate. There's no real world notability asserted here and no non-primary sources cited. Cheers,
332:
This also strikes me as a clear case where a merge would be the appropriate approach rather than a straight deletion.
49:
469:
409:
397:
337:
36:
468:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
87:
82:
35:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
151:. There is no current assertion for future improvement of the article, so extended coverage is unnecessary.
386:
91:
74:
402:
333:
263:
224:
451:
431:
382:
365:
454:
442:
414:
388:
369:
341:
323:
319:
292:
267:
248:
228:
195:
160:
56:
29:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
170:
378:
259:
220:
204:
188:
48:. merging doesn't require continuation of this AfD and there's no-consensus to delete.
427:
354:
350:
288:
244:
216:
156:
148:
136:
132:
315:
177:
174:
144:
140:
108:
212:
208:
128:
181:
78:
283:
239:
152:
462:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
70:
62:
173:. None of the content is usable anywhere else because it is
400:
as there is no independent notability outside the series.
215:. The article is 100% plot summary and thus also fails
115:
104:
100:
96:
426:
article and reduces the chances for recreation. --
39:). No further edits should be made to this page.
472:). No further edits should be made to this page.
8:
309:list of Film-related deletion discussions
307:: This debate has been included in the
143:. Most of the information is made up of
7:
420:Merge and/or redirect one level up
127:This character does not establish
24:
18:Knowledge:Articles for deletion
1:
455:04:54, 21 December 2008 (UTC)
443:21:11, 19 December 2008 (UTC)
415:21:04, 19 December 2008 (UTC)
389:09:37, 19 December 2008 (UTC)
370:08:10, 19 December 2008 (UTC)
342:05:51, 19 December 2008 (UTC)
324:05:49, 19 December 2008 (UTC)
293:14:53, 23 December 2008 (UTC)
268:10:16, 19 December 2008 (UTC)
249:03:55, 19 December 2008 (UTC)
229:01:35, 19 December 2008 (UTC)
196:01:24, 19 December 2008 (UTC)
161:00:04, 19 December 2008 (UTC)
141:reliable, third party sources
57:01:24, 24 December 2008 (UTC)
448:Delete or Redirect as above
398:List of Godzilla characters
489:
135:through the inclusion of
465:Please do not modify it.
149:unnecessary plot details
32:Please do not modify it.
137:real world information
362:
44:The result was
440:
434:
355:
326:
312:
178:original research
145:original research
480:
467:
438:
432:
405:
361:
358:
313:
303:
186:
118:
112:
94:
54:
34:
488:
487:
483:
482:
481:
479:
478:
477:
476:
470:deletion review
463:
403:
359:
356:
334:ChildofMidnight
256:already present
192:
182:
131:independent of
114:
85:
69:
66:
50:
37:deletion review
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
486:
484:
475:
474:
458:
457:
445:
417:
391:
372:
344:
327:
300:
299:
298:
297:
296:
295:
273:
272:
271:
270:
231:
198:
190:
125:
124:
65:
60:
42:
41:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
485:
473:
471:
466:
460:
459:
456:
453:
449:
446:
444:
441:
435:
429:
425:
421:
418:
416:
413:
412:
411:
407:
406:
399:
395:
392:
390:
387:
384:
380:
376:
373:
371:
367:
363:
352:
351:Godzilla 2000
348:
345:
343:
339:
335:
331:
328:
325:
321:
317:
310:
306:
302:
301:
294:
290:
286:
285:
279:
278:
277:
276:
275:
274:
269:
265:
261:
257:
252:
251:
250:
246:
242:
241:
235:
232:
230:
226:
222:
218:
214:
210:
206:
202:
199:
197:
194:
193:
187:
185:
179:
176:
172:
168:
165:
164:
163:
162:
158:
154:
150:
146:
142:
138:
134:
133:Godzilla 2000
130:
122:
117:
110:
106:
102:
98:
93:
89:
84:
80:
76:
72:
68:
67:
64:
61:
59:
58:
55:
53:
47:
40:
38:
33:
27:
26:
19:
464:
461:
447:
423:
419:
410:
408:
401:
393:
374:
346:
330:Strong Merge
329:
304:
282:
255:
238:
233:
200:
189:
183:
171:undue weight
166:
126:
51:
46:no consensus
45:
43:
31:
28:
217:WP:NOT#PLOT
129:notability
347:Redirect:
316:• Gene93k
260:IllaZilla
221:IllaZilla
175:unsourced
439:contribs
428:Jayron32
404:Schmidt,
375:Redirect
121:View log
424:correct
379:WP:FICT
205:WP:FICT
88:protect
83:history
201:Delete
167:Delete
116:delete
92:delete
394:Merge
139:from
119:) – (
109:views
101:watch
97:links
52:StarM
16:<
433:talk
381:. -
377:per
366:talk
360:4314
357:Ryan
338:talk
320:talk
305:Note
289:talk
264:talk
245:talk
234:Keep
225:talk
213:WP:V
209:WP:N
207:nor
184:Reyk
157:talk
147:and
105:logs
79:talk
75:edit
71:Orga
63:Orga
396:to
383:Mgm
349:To
314:--
311:.
284:DGG
240:DGG
191:YO!
153:TTN
452:CP
368:)
340:)
322:)
291:)
266:)
247:)
227:)
180:.
159:)
107:|
103:|
99:|
95:|
90:|
86:|
81:|
77:|
436:.
430:.
385:|
364:(
336:(
318:(
287:(
262:(
243:(
223:(
155:(
123:)
113:(
111:)
73:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.