KHWiki:Pages for deletion

__NEWSECTIONLINK__ This is the page for listing articles, templates, categories, or other pages to discuss deletion. Voice your opinion on the deletion of these items by adding a bulleted comment and signing your name at the end of your comment with ~. Once a discussion has concluded, an administrator will close the discussion. Discussions may be archived a week after being closed.

To add a new heading, click the "+" button at the top of the page or click here. You will be given a box to input a header or topic.
 * To list an article, type article title.
 * To list a category type : Category:Name of category. Remember the colon in the beginning or it won't link correctly.
 * To list a template, type to generate a link to the template.

For archived discussions, see /Archives.

Category:Villains
This seems redundant to Category:Enemies, is there any difference? Scottch 00:49, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete - unless some difference is shown, I might just be overlooking the difference. Scottch 00:49, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep - The difference is that "Villains" is more specific; like Bosses. To be a villain, one must be both a character and an enemy, AND have a prominent role in the story (i.e. Zexion, Maleficent, Xehanort's Heartless, and Master Control Program).--Dreyfus 22:20, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Wouldn't that be covered in both parent and lesser categories though? That makes "villains" a combo of both the "enemies" and "characters" categories, but that can be further broken down into "Disney bosses", "Organization XIII" etc.  Categories like that - that come from mixing two categories, but still branching off - are pretty awkward in my opinion.  Scottch 10:25, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

Closed
The result was no consensus - so, it stays. Scott ch 03:45, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

Sitar, Chakrams and other weapon articles
All these pages say is that they are used by their respective owners, which is already mentioned in Demyx, Axel, et al. They should be redirected to those articles or they'll be completely redundant. Scott ch 05:44, 15 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Redirect - as above. Scott ch 05:44, 15 January 2007 (UTC) Changed to merge, Hecko X's idea is better.  Scott ch 18:52, 15 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Merge into an article simply entitled "Weapons" or "List of Weapons". --Hecko X 13:57, 15 January 2007 (UTC)
 * This is a better idea, actually. Scott ch 18:52, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

Closed
The result was merge. Scott ch 03:46, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

Ansem Report individual pages
This is Ansem Reports 1, Ansem Report 2 etc. All they are currently is copyvios, I don't think there's any need for seperate articles. Copying the text verbatim is a copyright violation, so I say redirect to Ansem Reports.
 * Redirect as above. Scott ch 06:27, 15 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Redirect. WOAH!  I never knew this was in the pages when I made the Ansem's Report article!  What a coincidence!  Uh...  I'd say that either they are redirected to Ansem's Report, or otherwise (see the article's discussion page).--Dreyfus 21:54, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

Closed
CLosed as redirect Scott ch 03:43, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

Kingdom Hearts III
Everything is based on rumors and theories with absolutely nothing substancial. If someone wrote the almost exact opposite it could be just as true. It is misleading and until more information has been verified, serves absolutely no purpose (but to mislead).


 * Delete - for above reasons. --Hecko X 14:09, 15 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Unsure - the article really does suck, but so do several others. We don't necessarily have content guidelines set up, but I anticipate people will be okay with adding a lot of info about the gaming population's theories - it does target that audience after all - but that article is particularly heinous and treats it all as fact when it most certainly is not.  It's an article we should have, but not anything close to its current state.  If this does get "deleted", I'll move it to my userspace and leave it up for editing for that reason.  What's it's presentable I'll move it back, and if people don't want a KHIII article up at all, it'll have to be re-nominated.  <font color=#00cccc>Scott <font color=#ff9900>ch 18:56, 15 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Rewrite - This article should be here, but not in the state it is now. -Painocus
 * Rewrite - This article should be given a conjecture template (I'm about to make it), and should be rewritten to include only the KNOWN or SUGGESTED facts from the media, etc. Not anything guessed.--Dreyfus 22:02, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Then the article will be reduced to: "The main characters will not be Sora, Riku or Kairi, but original characters.", which is kind of a waste (which is why it might as well be deleted, in my oppinion). Other than that, nothing is confirmed. Noone even knows if it will be an actual game (it's Advent Children all over again).
 * O_O No Sora!? I think I'm going to cry...--Dreyfus 00:53, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
 * As I know it has never bin said that Sora and the others is not the main characters, only that they are not the three characters in the KH2's secret ending.-Painocus
 * Even better, then we have absolutely nothing to go on, besides that. --Hecko X 22:42, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

Closed
I'm going to get this out of main namespace and put it in User:Scottch/KHIII. Anyone can edit it from there, and once it's ready, anyone can relist it here or go the community portal to see if there are any objections to moving it back. <font color=#00cccc>Scott <font color=#ff9900>ch 03:44, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

Hayabusa
Seems like this could be merged with Shan-Yu - not really an independent character. <font color=#00cccc>Scott <font color=#ff9900>ch 06:56, 26 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Merge - as nominator. <font color=#00cccc>Scott <font color=#ff9900>ch 06:56, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

Rising Sun, Overtaker, Berserk, etc.
All of them are Reaction commands (the c in "command" should be uppercase, btw), and as such, won't be able to get past maybe 2-4 lines. It's basically a waste of space for all of them to have independant articles. It would be more efficient to merge them into the Reaction Command article, with redirects leading to it, i.e. Berserk redirects to Reaction command


 * Merge for above reasons. --Hecko X 07:59, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Unsure - however, section redirects don't work on Wikia, only on Wikipedia. <font color=#00cccc>Scott <font color=#ff9900>ch 10:25, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Then let them redirect to Reaction Command The important part is that they should merged. --Hecko X 11:25, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Merge - might be nice to expand into full articles eventually, but, I can easily see these pages getting abandoned. Let's get the more important stuff down first.  <font color=#00cccc>Scott <font color=#ff9900>ch 20:47, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

Animal Characters category
First of all, let me say that if the following circumstances didn't apply, then I'd be perfectly fine with this category. Anyway... I think this category should be deleted. It is a bit too general; same thing with Human Characters. Almost every single character is either a human character or an animal character (not to mention that all humans are animals). And since everybody seems to be against me in giving them both Character AND Character categories, that would just render the Character category almost obsolete. I mean, can YOU think of a character that is neither Human nor Animal? The only ones I can think of are some of the characters in the 100 Acre Wood and the characters in Space Paranoids. Everything else is either a Heartless, a Nobody, a Human, or a Non-Human animal!


 * Delete OR Keep - For the above reasons. I'll say Keep if we can include both "Character" and "_____ Character" categories.--Dreyfus 04:34, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment - Parent categories, even if empty of articles, are still helpful in category organization using the category tree. If subcategories have "" in them, they'll be organized as sub-categories, and the links to those subcategories will be at the top of the parent category links.  See Category:Items to see what I mean.  Other than that, I'm unsure about it.  <font color=#00cccc>Scott <font color=#ff9900>ch 01:42, 28 January 2007 (UTC)