- 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 merge to List of generation I Pokémon#Lapras. Eddie891 Talk Work 17:30, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Lapras (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
There is a huge slow-burn edit war going on in this page, largely because people are interpreting the prematurely withdrawn earlier AfD as a de facto keep. The older AfD was withdrawn inappropriately, since it was a WP:SUPERVOTE by nominator despite half the votes calling for a redirect. After checking the sources, I am heavily under the belief that Lapras is non-notable fancruft. Any major coverage is related to Lapras becoming a regional mascot, a publicity stunt that also applies to numerous other Pokemon. WP:NOTPROMO. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 10:56, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Redirect to List of generation I Pokémon#Lapras (and perhaps merge some of the info about its status as a mascot into the section). Not that I want this article removed, but it's clear that outside of character's position as symbol for Japanese prefectures, there isn't much commentary of Lapras itself outside of short summary listicles. I've checked myself and could find much. And as mentioned by the nominator, the previous AFD was pulled as super keep, despite half of the respondents calling for the article to be redirected. And since then, the regulations and qualification standards for what can pass for a video game character article has significantly changed per the founding of the Video game character task force, meaning the keep votes from the 2021 AFD don't hold the same weight as they once did. CaptainGalaxy 12:35, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Redirect per nom. Personally I think the promo contributes to notability in this case, but even then there just isn't enough to bolster a whole article. Ping me if sources are found but otherwise I don't think there's enough here. Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 18:36, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Redirect with no predjudice to recreate if notable later I feel as time has gone on more sources have been found to give notability to some subjects on here, and often AfD is a deterrent towards that. At this time, after a thorough WP:BEFORE, there's not enough material here for notability.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 23:08, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Weak keep or merge. Some sources mention him in the heading. At mimimum, merge - no referenced detail should be lost. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 23:52, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Weak keep or merge, as there is some coverage, and concurring with Piotrus that nothing is gained in loosing referenced, encyclopedic information in a pure redirect. Daranios (talk) 11:36, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Redirect or merge there isn't enough for WP:SIGCOV. A limited merge at the target is fine. Shooterwalker (talk) 20:33, 22 March 2024 (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.