48:. It seems fairly clear that there is a consensus on this; as pointed out, when the sections of the article that are already duplicated elsewhere are removed, there is very little sourced material left. It would be better to move this out of mainspace until it can be fixed (which I am sure it can - though having survived in this state for so long may suggest otherwise).
1005:
With all due respect to
Triiiple Threat, (although I agree with you that I rushed it) it doesn't matter anyways, the article is going to stay with the result of keep or no consensus. Although I don't regret bringing this to AFD because that's sometimes what needs to be done for people to realize that
803:
franchise, especially the films, is very thoroughly covered, and it should be possible to balance in-universe and out-of-universe detail. There ought to be plenty of production information, not to mention critical analysis by academics. I suspect, though, that the video game programs and machines are
1014:
was feeling like it was. Now my reasoning for already putting it as a incubator was because I was concerned that if the result was more on the delete side, it could have been deleted before saved. Just because three people voted that incubation was a good idea didn't mean that was the final result.
894:
Could it not be a list of the non-human roles and the actors who played or voiced them? Perhaps with a one-sentence description for each? I specified interpretative passages because we cannot go beyond a basic description of a character when we reference only the primary source. Primary sources are
1069:
Update: I rewrote the section about the
Merovingian and Seraph. I also removed the original-research "Exiles" section and merged the subsections to "Programs" under "Films". Some other sections were shortened, too. The references in the article also cover some of the other characters, such as the
576:
See the five books that I listed in my !vote above. They could all be used as sources for the more minor characters which don't have their own articles. Some of the really minor characters (i.e. some of the characters which only appear in video games) may need to be deleted from the article if
644:
and nobody has lifted a finger to help it. Knowledge (XXG) isn't a random collection of unsourced information. If it couldn't be fixed in two years, I don't see why we have to wait forever for it to be fixed, just because it's really a character article. Too many times now I have seen AfDs with
440:
Well I am a strange person. I have seen AFD's help before, thanks to that rescue thing. And I also tagged rescue because I thought maybe there would be people like you that would want this article to stay and maybe fix the article instead of moping about why it should stay. I already did a few
808:
is also lacking a balance of content, and if it were a better article, than there could be a summary section of it in this list. At the same time, sections like the one about the
Trainman could be improved. For example, one result at Google Scholar says, "Further, the Trainman, introduced in
871:
The unreferenced content, if removed, would bring this article to...one sentence. It's been that way ever since it was created 4.5 years ago. For half of that time, it's been tagged as original research and in-universe. I'm all for improving articles. But, when an article has languished for
1092:
I would keep this, or perhaps merge it somewhere. Incubating it, and growing it, would also be options. Babying is better than deleting or negating something. I actually found something that I was looking for here, and I want other people to be able to do the same. Thanks.
686:
What exactly is the threshold of tolerance for articles that have persisted without sources, as original research and written in in-universe style? Or should we just accept all junk that exists because 100 years from now someone will get around to adding sources?
1015:
But as I said it doesn't matter because I feel that this article is going to stay, so I am going to speedy delete the article incubator with no problem. By the way, thank you for all your votes and concerns everybody that wrote here. You all made valid points. −
646:
602:: Sources and real world details could be added. I'm not going to say Delete because the article could be improved through regular editing. Real world details (which includes sources) should definitely be added. This is nothing but plot information. We have
809:
Revolutions, furthers the
Africanist narrative of the film in that he runs an 'underground railroad,' which is used to transport rogue programs from the central core of the Matrix." There are also citations about his similarity to Charon. Basically, the
152:
645:
people advocating keep because there really are sources out there, and gosh we just need to add them and we'll be fine! Either add them by the time this AfD expires or delete the dang thing. It's hard its two years in the spotlight, and failed.
1042:
I rewrote the sections for the
Trainman, Rama-Kandra, Kamala, and Sati. I also reduced the content of the video game characters to be more discriminate. A good way to find references is to use Google Book Search or Google Scholar Search, e.g.
798:
because I find the topic to be a valid grouping of elements. There is bound to be redundancy between certain articles, and I believe it is okay here. The article does focus too much on in-universe detail, but there is room for improvement.
626:
Exactly. I regret putting this at AFD because deleting this is not really what I want. For example some machines like the
Sentinels need to be introduced somewhere. But what I really want is this be more like a Knowledge (XXG) article. −
1070:
Oracle. The
Keymaker in particular has a reasonable article whose contents could be summarized for this list. The references themselves can be explored through Google Books Search or Amazon.com (the "Look Inside" feature).
86:
81:
667:
So your argument for deletion is that cleanup tags have persisted on the article for too long? What exactly is the threshold when persistent cleanup tags require the deletion of the article? 1 year? 2 years? See
90:
1187:
of all these programs and machines or that the list has become so indiscriminate as to cover things that really don't belong in
Knowledge (XXG). Leave the template and the notable characters, but delete this list.
73:
146:
371:. Searching for any of these programs and machines in those books will yield results. Also, on an unrelated topic, I'm thoroughly confused as to why someone would simultaneously nominate an article for
441:
changes on the article already. Now if you have sources, then by all means, put them down. Because googling sources is not my talent. And I was looking for third party sources not primary sources. −
963:, he should have waited for the outcome of the AFD first, then moved the entire article to the incubator if that is what is decided so that the revision history and talk page would also be kept.--
876:
long, the timer has expired. If someone wants to port this to user space, or the incubator, or wherever it is they want to work on it, fine. But to keep it in mainspace is absurd at this point. --
565:
Good point. But there are the least of the worries since they already have their own articles. The main worry is the ones that don't have articles. They are the most essential of this article. −
352:- While this article desperately needs references (many of which could be easily pulled from the main articles that it links to), the overall concept of the list is valid. It doesn't duplicate
223:
474:
Yeah I saw your sources. I never thought of going to Google books or thinking that as a reliable source. Sounds less third party. But hey, don't listen to me. You know what you are doing. ;}−
813:
articles as a set could use some loving from an editor willing to put in the time to find resources and boldly reform the content to strike the balance that's needed on
Knowledge (XXG).
287:
Despite the unusual name, this is simply a "list of characters" article limited to nonhumans for a major fictional franchise. As such, there's no reason other content can't be merged
113:
942:
426:
Nominating an article for deletion is a very strange way to ask for help with finding sources. Also, I found sources in about 30 seconds. Where were you looking?
849:
If the topic is considered notable, then the presence of unreferenced content does not justify deletion of the article itself. The unreferenced content within, per
200:
246:
167:
353:
314:
309:
You have failed to explain why it should be kept over the worst reason of them all. Lack of sources? Without sources how can we determine if this isn't full of
134:
1118:
I didn't really want the information deleted either. It being rdirected/merged, incubated or fixed is more of I what I had in mind even more than deleting. −
1197:
1167:
1124:
1108:
1083:
1060:
1021:
972:
951:
934:
908:
885:
866:
844:
835:...A balance that has been asked for over two years, with nobody doing anything about it. Again, how long are we to keep unreferenced junk lying around? --
826:
786:
766:
753:
718:
696:
681:
658:
621:
586:
571:
560:
536:
525:
480:
469:
455:
435:
421:
410:
390:
344:
323:
300:
278:
258:
235:
212:
189:
55:
415:
I believe this article could be rescue-able if it has sources, although I wasn't succesful in finding any, that doesn't mean anybody else couldn't. ;)−
356:, and it clearly differentiates itself as a list of non-human minor characters. The lists could be merged, but at that point would probably run into
128:
360:
issues. There are also plenty of sources available for this material, as many books have been written about the movie series and its story. See
124:
804:
not as well-covered, and I would support a more concise description of them. The way to approach this article is through others. For example,
398:
77:
1144:). A non-list article on the use of the theme of artificial constructs in these movies, that would "provide non-fictional perspective" (per
269:
174:
397:
I will agree that the title of the article is awkward. Are there any suggestions for a better one? The only one I can come up with is
69:
61:
640:: This might seem harsh, but this article has been tagged as being original research and also written in a primarily in-universe style
1100:
736:
and does not warrant inclusion in article space. However this does not mean that the article is incapable of meeting this criteria as
17:
52:
1183:. The remainder have no sources and have stayed that way for many years. I can only draw the conclusion that it's impossible to
140:
449:
Replying to the name changing comment of
Snottywong. If this article is kept. I will purpose a name change for the article. −
1184:
310:
1140:. Also given the theme of these movies, "programs and machines" are a fairly ubiquitous component of them (a bit like a
1212:
36:
1161:
1079:
1056:
904:
862:
822:
1141:
1211:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
1176:
968:
749:
35:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
1193:
1180:
1104:
502:
Notice how many of the characters listed have their own well referenced articles? They get ample coverage.
1096:
335:
Mainly a rehashing of the story, which should have already been given in the main article on the series.
674:
669:
579:
462:
428:
403:
383:
1189:
1137:
377:. If you believe the article is "rescue-able", then why would you nominate it for deletion instead of
930:
881:
840:
692:
654:
49:
378:
1148:
964:
922:
779:
745:
711:
614:
553:
160:
850:
357:
1119:
1016:
960:
946:
761:
628:
566:
531:
475:
450:
442:
416:
318:
296:
273:
253:
230:
207:
184:
183:
Uncited, trivial in universe list article. As much as I like the Matrix, this doesn't cut it. −
29:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
945:. Although if this article does stay, I will probably just request speedy deletion on it. −
503:
340:
956:
733:
647:
Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion/List of traps in the Saw film series (3rd nomination)
460:
The sources I found are listed in my original !vote above. They are not primary sources.
1011:
926:
877:
836:
737:
688:
673:
650:
578:
461:
427:
402:
382:
741:
1075:
1052:
900:
858:
818:
774:
706:
609:
548:
577:
sources can't be found for them, but that is no reason to delete the entire article.
292:
1175:
all of the characters with third-party sources already have their own article, like
107:
369:
367:
365:
363:
361:
805:
336:
1157:
317:, majority of what's on this list, I don't see why they can't be on there. −
1071:
1048:
1007:
896:
854:
814:
703:
Agree with Hammersoft. This is why Knowledge (XXG) is not taken seriously. —
1010:, that's exactly what's been done. So this AFD was not a bad thing like
603:
1205:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
530:
Them having their own articles could be argued as redundant. −
1154:) on them, might be a worthy inclusion, but not this list.
895:
largely used here, despite actual presence of citations.
853:, can be pared down, especially interpretative passages.
740:
has pointed out. I propose the article be moved to the
399:
List of non-human minor characters in the Matrix series
373:
224:
list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions
103:
99:
95:
744:
until it is ready to be reincluded in article space.--
159:
173:
70:List of programs and machines in the Matrix series
62:List of programs and machines in the Matrix series
39:). No further edits should be made to this page.
1215:). No further edits should be made to this page.
1006:an article needs work and due to editors like
354:List of minor characters in the Matrix series
315:List of minor characters in the Matrix series
8:
921:be, but isn't. It hasn't for 4.5 years. See
241:
218:
201:list of Lists-related deletion discussions
195:
247:list of Film-related deletion discussions
541:Notice how none of those sources are in
245:: This debate has been included in the
222:: This debate has been included in the
199:: This debate has been included in the
291:and/or trivia be condensed out of it.
732:: The article as it stands now fails
18:Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion
7:
268:This article has been nominated for
24:
1136:largely unsourced in-universe
313:. And keep in mind there is a
1:
1198:18:07, 18 December 2010 (UTC)
1168:05:39, 18 December 2010 (UTC)
1125:16:49, 17 December 2010 (UTC)
1109:15:55, 16 December 2010 (UTC)
1084:15:00, 17 December 2010 (UTC)
1061:17:59, 14 December 2010 (UTC)
1022:19:11, 14 December 2010 (UTC)
973:16:43, 14 December 2010 (UTC)
952:16:18, 14 December 2010 (UTC)
935:16:10, 14 December 2010 (UTC)
909:16:08, 14 December 2010 (UTC)
886:15:58, 14 December 2010 (UTC)
867:15:35, 14 December 2010 (UTC)
845:15:12, 14 December 2010 (UTC)
827:12:54, 14 December 2010 (UTC)
787:01:28, 14 December 2010 (UTC)
767:01:02, 14 December 2010 (UTC)
754:01:01, 14 December 2010 (UTC)
719:01:28, 14 December 2010 (UTC)
697:00:32, 14 December 2010 (UTC)
682:23:32, 13 December 2010 (UTC)
659:22:44, 13 December 2010 (UTC)
622:21:22, 13 December 2010 (UTC)
587:23:36, 13 December 2010 (UTC)
572:21:51, 13 December 2010 (UTC)
561:21:22, 13 December 2010 (UTC)
537:21:13, 13 December 2010 (UTC)
526:21:08, 13 December 2010 (UTC)
481:20:42, 14 December 2010 (UTC)
470:20:25, 14 December 2010 (UTC)
456:16:18, 14 December 2010 (UTC)
436:23:34, 13 December 2010 (UTC)
422:20:39, 13 December 2010 (UTC)
411:20:21, 13 December 2010 (UTC)
401:, which is equally awkward.
391:20:19, 13 December 2010 (UTC)
345:22:34, 12 December 2010 (UTC)
324:20:43, 12 December 2010 (UTC)
301:20:25, 12 December 2010 (UTC)
279:20:02, 12 December 2010 (UTC)
259:19:55, 12 December 2010 (UTC)
236:19:43, 12 December 2010 (UTC)
213:19:34, 12 December 2010 (UTC)
190:19:28, 12 December 2010 (UTC)
56:11:21, 20 December 2010 (UTC)
1142:List of fish in Finding Nemo
734:general notablity guidelines
1232:
959:to our esteemed colleague
1045:matrix wachowski trainman
1208:Please do not modify it.
1177:Merovingian (The Matrix)
925:'s Incubate proposal. --
771:Agree with incubation. —
32:Please do not modify it.
1181:The Oracle (The Matrix)
760:I do like that idea. −
642:for more than two years
1185:WP:verify notability
957:With all due respect
923:User:TriiipleThreat
374:deletion and rescue
379:fixing it yourself
1099:comment added by
742:article incubator
311:original research
281:
261:
250:
238:
227:
215:
204:
46:Move to incubator
1223:
1210:
1166:
1153:
1147:
1122:
1111:
1019:
949:
785:
782:
777:
764:
717:
714:
709:
679:
678:
631:
620:
617:
612:
584:
583:
569:
559:
556:
551:
534:
522:
519:
516:
513:
510:
507:
478:
467:
466:
453:
445:
433:
432:
419:
408:
407:
388:
387:
376:
321:
276:
264:
256:
251:
233:
228:
210:
205:
187:
178:
177:
163:
111:
93:
44:The result was
34:
1231:
1230:
1226:
1225:
1224:
1222:
1221:
1220:
1219:
1213:deletion review
1206:
1164:
1155:
1151:
1145:
1120:
1094:
1017:
1012:User:Snottywong
947:
780:
775:
772:
762:
712:
707:
704:
676:
629:
615:
610:
607:
581:
567:
554:
549:
546:
532:
520:
517:
514:
511:
508:
505:
476:
464:
451:
443:
430:
417:
405:
385:
372:
319:
274:
254:
231:
208:
185:
120:
84:
68:
65:
37:deletion review
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
1229:
1227:
1218:
1217:
1201:
1200:
1170:
1160:
1130:
1129:
1128:
1127:
1113:
1112:
1089:
1088:
1087:
1086:
1064:
1063:
1039:
1038:
1037:
1036:
1035:
1034:
1033:
1032:
1031:
1030:
1029:
1028:
1027:
1026:
1025:
1024:
988:
987:
986:
985:
984:
983:
982:
981:
980:
979:
978:
977:
976:
975:
965:TriiipleThreat
938:
937:
912:
911:
889:
888:
830:
829:
792:
791:
790:
789:
757:
756:
746:TriiipleThreat
726:
725:
724:
723:
722:
721:
700:
699:
662:
661:
635:
634:
633:
597:
596:
595:
594:
593:
592:
591:
590:
589:
496:
495:
494:
493:
492:
491:
490:
489:
488:
487:
486:
485:
484:
483:
394:
393:
347:
329:
328:
327:
326:
304:
303:
282:
262:
239:
216:
181:
180:
117:
64:
59:
50:Black Kite (t)
42:
41:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
1228:
1216:
1214:
1209:
1203:
1202:
1199:
1195:
1191:
1190:Shooterwalker
1186:
1182:
1178:
1174:
1171:
1169:
1165:
1163:
1159:
1150:
1143:
1139:
1135:
1132:
1131:
1126:
1123:
1117:
1116:
1115:
1114:
1110:
1106:
1102:
1098:
1091:
1090:
1085:
1081:
1077:
1073:
1068:
1067:
1066:
1065:
1062:
1058:
1054:
1050:
1046:
1041:
1040:
1023:
1020:
1013:
1009:
1004:
1003:
1002:
1001:
1000:
999:
998:
997:
996:
995:
994:
993:
992:
991:
990:
989:
974:
970:
966:
962:
961:Jhenderson777
958:
955:
954:
953:
950:
944:
940:
939:
936:
932:
928:
924:
920:
916:
915:
914:
913:
910:
906:
902:
898:
893:
892:
891:
890:
887:
883:
879:
875:
870:
869:
868:
864:
860:
856:
852:
848:
847:
846:
842:
838:
834:
833:
832:
831:
828:
824:
820:
816:
812:
807:
802:
797:
794:
793:
788:
784:
783:
778:
770:
769:
768:
765:
759:
758:
755:
751:
747:
743:
739:
735:
731:
728:
727:
720:
716:
715:
710:
702:
701:
698:
694:
690:
685:
684:
683:
680:
671:
666:
665:
664:
663:
660:
656:
652:
648:
643:
639:
636:
632:
625:
624:
623:
619:
618:
613:
605:
601:
598:
588:
585:
575:
574:
573:
570:
564:
563:
562:
558:
557:
552:
544:
540:
539:
538:
535:
529:
528:
527:
524:
523:
501:
498:
497:
482:
479:
473:
472:
471:
468:
459:
458:
457:
454:
448:
447:
446:
439:
438:
437:
434:
425:
424:
423:
420:
414:
413:
412:
409:
400:
396:
395:
392:
389:
380:
375:
370:
368:
366:
364:
362:
359:
355:
351:
348:
346:
342:
338:
334:
331:
330:
325:
322:
316:
312:
308:
307:
306:
305:
302:
298:
294:
290:
286:
283:
280:
277:
271:
267:
263:
260:
257:
248:
244:
240:
237:
234:
225:
221:
217:
214:
211:
202:
198:
194:
193:
192:
191:
188:
176:
172:
169:
166:
162:
158:
154:
151:
148:
145:
142:
139:
136:
133:
130:
126:
123:
122:Find sources:
118:
115:
109:
105:
101:
97:
92:
88:
83:
79:
75:
71:
67:
66:
63:
60:
58:
57:
54:
51:
47:
40:
38:
33:
27:
26:
19:
1207:
1204:
1172:
1156:
1133:
1101:65.5.251.196
1044:
943:incubated it
918:
873:
810:
800:
795:
773:
729:
705:
670:WP:IMPERFECT
641:
637:
608:
599:
547:
543:this article
542:
504:
499:
349:
332:
288:
284:
265:
242:
219:
196:
182:
170:
164:
156:
149:
143:
137:
131:
121:
45:
43:
31:
28:
1138:WP:FANCRUFT
1095:—Preceding
806:Agent Smith
606:for that. —
147:free images
1149:inuniverse
1121:Jhenderson
1018:Jhenderson
948:Jhenderson
941:I already
927:Hammersoft
878:Hammersoft
837:Hammersoft
801:The Matrix
763:Jhenderson
738:Snottywong
689:Hammersoft
651:Hammersoft
649:anyone? --
630:Jhenderson
568:Jhenderson
533:Jhenderson
477:Jhenderson
452:Jhenderson
444:Jhenderson
418:Jhenderson
320:Jhenderson
275:Jhenderson
255:Jhenderson
232:Jhenderson
209:Jhenderson
186:Jhenderson
1008:User:Erik
851:WP:BURDEN
358:WP:LENGTH
1097:unsigned
1080:contribs
1057:contribs
905:contribs
863:contribs
823:contribs
730:Incubate
293:Jclemens
114:View log
1134:Delete:
600:Comment
153:WP refs
141:scholar
87:protect
82:history
1173:Delete
811:Matrix
675:Snotty
638:Delete
580:Snotty
463:Snotty
429:Snotty
404:Snotty
384:Snotty
337:Borock
333:Delete
270:rescue
125:Google
91:delete
1162:Stalk
1158:Hrafn
919:could
781:Allen
713:Allen
616:Allen
604:Wikia
555:Allen
521:Focus
266:Note:
168:JSTOR
129:books
108:views
100:watch
96:links
16:<
1194:talk
1179:and
1105:talk
1076:talk
1072:Erik
1053:talk
1049:Erik
969:talk
931:talk
901:talk
897:Erik
882:talk
874:this
859:talk
855:Erik
841:talk
819:talk
815:Erik
796:Keep
776:Mike
750:talk
708:Mike
693:talk
677:Wong
655:talk
611:Mike
582:Wong
550:Mike
500:Keep
465:Wong
431:Wong
406:Wong
386:Wong
350:Keep
341:talk
297:talk
289:here
285:Keep
272:. −
243:Note
220:Note
197:Note
161:FENS
135:news
104:logs
78:talk
74:edit
917:It
672:.
545:? —
381:?
252:—−
229:—−
206:—−
175:TWL
112:– (
53:(c)
1196:)
1152:}}
1146:{{
1107:)
1082:)
1078:|
1059:)
1055:|
1047:.
971:)
933:)
907:)
903:|
884:)
865:)
861:|
843:)
825:)
821:|
752:)
695:)
687:--
657:)
343:)
299:)
249:.
226:.
203:.
155:)
106:|
102:|
98:|
94:|
89:|
85:|
80:|
76:|
1192:(
1103:(
1074:(
1051:(
967:(
929:(
899:(
880:(
857:(
839:(
817:(
748:(
691:(
653:(
518:m
515:a
512:e
509:r
506:D
339:(
295:(
179:)
171:·
165:·
157:·
150:·
144:·
138:·
132:·
127:(
119:(
116:)
110:)
72:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.