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. Sandstein (talk) 14:09, 9 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

List of minor Sailor Moon characters[edit]

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

Unnotable list that fails WP:FICT and is mostly WP:PLOT. Fancruft/trivia mostly. Oddly enough, unlike most minor character lists, this one actually does include a few significant characters, but there appears to be no List of characters in Sailor Moon, so an possible alternative to deletion would be a rename, cull out all the minor characters, and make it a list of major/significant characters instead. Collectonian 00:16, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep for now. It looks like the guideline that allowed many pages of characters to be consolidated into these lists was changed, without being well advertized, back in August 2007. One editor, in fact, changed how the policy reads, although supposedly this was a stylistic change of some sort. Since that seems unfair, we should retain these lists and return the guideline to its pre-August state, and then debate it openly later. Fee Fi Foe Fum 00:49, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: Per the nom's reason. Why can't these be incorporated in to the appropriate Sailor Moon article? - Rjd0060 00:50, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep and Cleanup per Collectionian's suggestion. Naru Osaka and Yuichirou Kumada are important enough to have mention here, but Sailor Chanel and Makoto Hanamatsura? Not so much. JuJube 01:22, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • The plan is to move those guys once we get an article about the Sailor Moon sidestories and omake up and running. (Which will also merge with Parallel Sailor Moon.) --Masamage ♫ 03:32, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep and Cleanup per Collectonian's suggestion. I suppose why they are called minor is because you can only say there are 10 major characters (Senshi + Tuxedo Mask + Chibiusa) and the main character, Usagi. The minor characters are recurring characters which have certain tie in with the plots of the 5 seasons but have to be listed as minor. Example, Naru always gets attacked by the antagonist one way or another, and Yuuichiro plays the love interest for Rei. The article in question is the appropriate article for all of these minor but recurring characters. --Hanaichi 02:25, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Obvious keep and clean up per nom. Wait, "keep per nom"? Why is this discussion happening in a deletion forum rather than on the article's talk page? --Masamage ♫ 03:32, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. The article needs clean-up, but it isn't total fancruft. Maser ^(Talk!) 07:20, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Rename and merge/keep per nom's suggestion. – sgeureka ^t•c 10:48, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Obvious Keep The article is not even compleate. There are other charcters that need to be coverd such as the Maenads. Also there are many more even more minor charcters would could have coverd suchs ohhh let me think... every single victim of the day? I think we provided a nice standard for what we belive is minor and not just pointless. We just chose the word minor becuase incomparison to the main 10 (Main 14/15 in the final season) they were minor. Most of them stop appearing by the final arc. Lego3400: The Sage of Time 14:21, 4 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think its obvious, and while its sheer length should be a sign of completion, it isn't. From the article talk page I see you are moving in even more characters from WikiMoon, the Sailor Moon wiki where such excessively detailed, in-universe info is good and appropriate. Why not leave it over there and make the appropriate link off to it from the appropriate page? What point/purpose is there in duplicating the information here when WikiMoon is the far better forum for it and it faces deletion here because it does NOT fit in with the Wikipedia guidelines and policies? Collectonian 18:48, 4 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, not all of the characters mentioned on the talk page can be added; we know absolutely nothing about several of the really minor ones, so they probably will have to be left to WikiMoon. Many of the characters already discussed in the article, though, are only considered "minor" because there are so ridiculously many Sailor Senshi. In the first 10% of the season, for example, Naru is more or less a main character. In fact, I bet she figures in more episodes than Sailor Saturn does. The same goes for several of the others in the list, and for the really minor ones we've included, there are already plans about moving them around to other existing articles where their mention is more appropriate. (Also, while I'm thinking of it, I've been working on a proper list for ages and it's almost ready.) --Masamage ♫ 19:00, 4 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comment perhaps, then, a better title would be List of secondary Sailor Moon characters? —Quasirandom (talk) 20:31, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Comics and animation-related deletions. -- Hiding T 11:28, 4 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep and cleanup per Collectionian and JuJube. If possible, out-of-universe data should be added. Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 07:06, 5 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Anime and manga-related deletions. —Quasirandom (talk) 15:57, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep I of course cant judge the significance of these characters, but doing the article like this is immensely superior to trying to have individual articles. This is the sort of article which, according to WP:SUMMARY, should be encouraged. The current version of the fiction guideline saying otherwise seems to be totally disputed, and rightly so, for it is at odds with general WP principles. DGG (talk) 20:51, 8 December 2007 (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.