![]() | This discussion was subject to a deletion review on 2011 June 6. For an explanation of the process, see Wikipedia:Deletion review. |
The result was delete. The lack of reliable third-party sources about this topic, as raised by the "delete" opinions, is a very strong argument based in policy, see WP:V#Notability. It is not addressed (or only in passing, or evaded) by the "keep" opinions, which are therefore given substantially less weight. This leads me to conclude that consensus exists to delete this article. Sandstein 17:55, 24 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Per WP:IINFO and WP:NOTDIR, this plot-only list of fictional weapons in a specific Gundam manga series is not encyclopaedic. There don't seem to be any reliable secondary sources which cover the topic. Previous discussion closed as no consensus. Anthem of joy (talk) 14:06, 15 May 2011 (UTC) adding strike-out of AfD nomination by sockpuppet Unscintillating (talk) 22:55, 19 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
((cite journal))
: |author=
has generic name (help) (Attributes series popularity to the varied mecha designs)((cite journal))
: |author=
has generic name (help) (Mentions an original Strike Gundam action feature being bundled with the March 2003 issue of Newtype Japan)Therefore, because this is a spin-out of the parent article - notability can be justified through sources related to the parent topic. We don't have to provide sources that that is *only* about mobile suits and nothing else. --Kraftlos (Talk | Contrib) 04:21, 22 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]"Summary style articles, with sub-articles giving greater detail, are not POV forking, provided that all the sub-articles, and the summary, conform to Neutral Point of View. Essentially, it is generally acceptable to have different levels of detail of a subject on different pages, provided that each provides a balanced view of the subject matter."