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 keep. and merge the other two to List of minor Power Rangers characters Black Kite 01:35, 24 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

List of minor Power Rangers characters[edit]

List of minor Power Rangers characters (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)

Cannot find coverage in reliable sources. The page itself is entirely sourceless. Also nominating related pages:

• Ninjor (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
• Alpha 6 (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

—Mythdon (talk • contribs) 00:01, 20 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. -- Raven1977 (talk) 04:04, 20 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fictional characters-related deletion discussions. -- Raven1977 (talk) 04:04, 20 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep the list and possibly merge the other two unless it can be argued they're major characters. Plenty of precedent for minor character lists for TV shows, and this is preferable to doing separate articles on each one. This is an example of a topic that faces discrimination by Wikipedia because it's a recent media topic and therefore is unlikely to have much third-party coverage. However the existence of the characters can be verified by checking the shows cited, therefore "verifiability, not truth" is satisfied. Obviously if there happens to be any WP:SYNTH or WP:OR going on then that should be trimmed, but that's a content issue. The Wikiproject under which this article fall should be contacted and encouraged to add sources that might exist. 23skidoo (talk) 04:41, 20 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep the lot. Poor sourcing for subjects that do exist does not mean that these articles should be deleted in any way. Sources might exist for them. And that is what should be looked for before they are AFD'd.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 06:33, 20 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• keep Just the sort of combination articles that ought to be kept The individuals covered in such articles do not have to be independently notable, The necessary sourcing for fictional characters can be dervived from the fiction itself, a suitably RS for the purpose of straightforward non controversial description. DGG (talk) 08:39, 22 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as there is no evidence of notability, per nom. Also it is not clear if this list is a synthesis or original research as there are no sources cited to verify its content. There is no encyclopedic content present in this article as it fails WP:NOT#PLOT or WP:NOT#GUIDE. --Gavin Collins (talk) 14:37, 23 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep per general consensus to merge articles up to list articles. Phil Sandifer (talk) 15:02, 23 November 2008 (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.