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 delete. Community consensus has now shifted against including "dumping ground" collection articles of in-universe descriptions of non-notable fictional elements from notable franchises. This AfD is one of many to illustrate this. Because of the concerns expressed, I'm not at this time unlinking backlinks or deleting redirects, so people who care can find another franchise-related article to redirect these search terms to. Sandstein 20:53, 28 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

List of Autobots[edit]

List of Autobots (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This list no longer has any utility. The series previously had somewhere between 600-1000 character articles. It now has 20. There are also around 20 character lists, so this is not a necessary navigational list. Autobot can hold a small list of blue links if that's actually necessary. This is just a barebones list of names, and even that is useless because most of these characters have two to three different versions due to most of these series being completely different continuities only sharing some core character concepts. Due to that, this cannot function as a proper navigational hub without being even more of a mess than its current incarnation. TTN (talk) 12:56, 20 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. TTN (talk) 12:56, 20 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Video games-related deletion discussions. TTN (talk) 12:56, 20 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Comics and animation-related deletion discussions. TTN (talk) 12:56, 20 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Anime and manga-related deletion discussions. TTN (talk) 12:56, 20 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 12:58, 20 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• KEEP 20 blue links are enough to justify a list of this type. And the other lists are character lists for notable television shows. Dream Focus 14:30, 20 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • In what way do 20 articles characters justify listing 1000+? That's also 20 in total, so the number for this list is around half that, or less. This is also just an alternate way to categorize characters rather than a primary way, so all characters are already covered elsewhere. TTN (talk) 14:36, 20 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • WP:CLN allows for lists to cover content also in categories. --Izno (talk) 15:13, 20 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
      • There's no longer an Autobot category. There is only the singular character category and the list category. The characters in the category are already covered on the various lists. This is simply an unneeded in-universe designation no longer relevant to the navigation of these articles due to the 2% retention of articles. TTN (talk) 15:20, 20 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
        • I also want to point out that under List of The Transformers (TV series) characters there is a whole section of characters under "Autobots". This is just by checking out the first list on the lists page. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 15:15, 21 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• This should probably be a long-form list and it should probably be the summary version (or possibly merge target, depending on which articles one might think should not be covered in stand-alone articles) of the remaining character articles. --Izno (talk) 15:13, 20 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete the list has far too many circular redirects to justify having it at all.John Pack Lambert (talk) 19:12, 20 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This list has issues, but I don't think circular redirects are a fair basis for deletion. Those can be overcome with some simple edits. -2pou (talk) 00:26, 25 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete Per WP:INDISCRIMINATE. A fancrufty list that accomplishes no purpose for non-fans of the series and fails WP:LISTN._{ZXCVBNM (TALK)} 23:09, 20 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per WP:INDISCRIMINATE. I see overlap here as we already have multiple lists for the characters in Transformers. Do we really need ones that include "By affiliation"? - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 15:12, 21 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete- as pointed out by JPL, a bare list of names consisting of circular redirects serves no purpose- navigational or otherwise. Reyk _YO! 20:50, 21 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - Not all the character lists include affiliation information (see: List of Transformers comics characters). The number of blue links in the list isn't important - the topic of Autobots is notable, therefore not all members on the list of Autobots need to be notable. The reason there are a lot of circular links is because many deletion discussions ended as "merge to List of Autobots" and is not in itself a valid reason to delete the list. The idea that it's of no purpose to non-fans isn't a valid reason to delete either - it's a tautology that readers only have an interest in articles on subjects they're interested in.

Could the list be better organized? Yes. Would it be better if there was some inclusion criteria beyond existence? Probably. Nuking this list would make it extremely difficult create an improved version. Argento Surfer (talk) 21:07, 21 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment: If this and List of Decepticons get deleted, then List of The Transformers (TV series) characters will be the only article on Wikipedia to even mention the existence of any Transformers characters other than the 20 or so that still have articles (at least until List of The Transformers (TV series) characters is nominated for deletion as well). There are, however, hundreds of Transformers characters that never appeared on the TV series. There should be at least some list article mentioning them. JIP | Talk 15:01, 22 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

What is the reasoning for keeping a mention of characters that do not appear in the TV series?Halbared (talk) 22:20, 23 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Because Transformers is much more than a TV series. It's a toy line first, a comic book second, and a TV series third. Contrary to what you might think, the TV series is not everything Transformers ever was. JIP | Talk 08:35, 24 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Best you don't assume what I do or do not know about TFs. There is a page about TFs that links to a dedicated TFwiki for the detail. There doesn't seem to be a notable/valid reason put forward as yet for listing every TF.Halbared (talk) 09:46, 24 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not saying we should list every Transformer, but it feels kind of artificial to limit the listing to those who appeared on the TV show, as I haven't seen any mention of the TV show being some authority over Transformers, especially since the comic book predated it. JIP | Talk 10:43, 24 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

List of Transformers comics characters exists. Argento Surfer (talk) 13:52, 24 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I want to restate that we are not Wikia, the information is useless to new readers and fans alike if the content can not be properly presented from an outside point of view (WP:INUNIVERSE). - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 14:47, 24 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep (extremely weakly) or worst-case Merge to one of the List of Transformers, if I have to pick one, let's say List of The Transformers (TV series) characters. Ideally, I'd rather say, Hold in a holding cell, but I don't know if that applies to AfDs or if that is exclusive to WP:TFD/H.

  First let me say that I don't think this list is truly necessary. However, my reservations on deleting it are rooted in a pretty big overall procedural concern, and not one regarding the content (or potential content) of the list.

  Checking the Talk page, at least 11 articles have gone to AfD and there was consensus to merge them into this list. I presume that there were also some that ended in a "Redirect" consensus as well, but I am not going to dig into that information to search for a number. Let's just go with "11+". 11+ articles were discussed through AfD alone, and the consensus among those discussions was that those particular articles did not merit a standalone article, but they were notable enough that outright deletion was not an acceptable solution, so a merge was to be done. I understand that WP:CCC, but I believe that would apply more to follow-on AfD nominations for specific articles. For a scenario such as this, we should at least WP:PRESERVE the data until a point at which someone can safely say WP:DON'T PRESERVE. In my mind, it is VERY IMPORTANT to proceed carefully to reach that point. If this list is deleted, all of those Merge and Redirect articles are going to be automatically deleted along with this list via WP:G8. That is unacceptable. With the preserved data of those articles gone, a new target cannot be established easily. What is the point of Wikipedia operating on consensus-based policies if it cannot uphold the consensus?

  In order to safely say WP:DON'T PRESERVE I think at least those 11 articles should be evaluated for a suitable new merge location and retargeted before this list is deleted, or they can all go to RfD to get a new consensus there before this list is deleted. Ideally, that would really be done for all the AfD's that resulted in a Redirect, but that may be a little much to overcome. Regards, 2pou (talk) 00:26, 25 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

It's not like the existing redirects can't just be re-targeted now or when the AfD is done so long as it's noted for the closer. They'd be better placed in one of the lists with actual content anyway. And if there's currently no list for them, one can be made on whatever piece of media features them. TTN (talk) 00:31, 25 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

No arguments there; I was mainly just suggesting that 11+ evaluations might be better served outside any 7-day high-stress, high-pressure (IMO) timelines that AfD generates amid people lives outside editing. If a note to closure works, that is fine too; I have just not seen that before. -2pou (talk) 17:22, 25 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete At this point, nearly every major iteration of the franchise already has coverage of their major characters, either as a separate list as shown at Lists of Transformers characters, or on the main article for the respective show/comic/etc. A massive list covering every Autobot, regardless of their notability, from a multitude of series, continuities, and timelines is not a useful way to present information that is already better presented elsewhere, and runs a bit afoul of being WP:INDISCRIMINATE. Rorshacma (talk) 20:10, 25 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete From what I've seen all the different versions have their own pages, no argument has advanced this in-universe page should stay and it is very poorly and clumsily worded with no differentiation between the original TFs.Halbared (talk) 21:46, 25 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Trainwreck This really needs to be organized more like List of He-Man and the Masters of the Universe characters where each character is introduced once from their original lines. List of autobots and List of decepticons can then merge to the List of Transformers AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 01:37, 26 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment - Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Decepticons (2nd nomination) and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Decepticons might be of interest to this discussion. Argento Surfer (talk) 20:33, 26 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Just noting that three additional tags have since been added to that list since the last AfD closed in July 2019. I added the CFORK tag which at least one other editor agreed upon at: Talk:List of Decepticons#CFORK issues. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 17:30, 27 February 2020 (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.