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 and redirect as stated in the discussion. - DiligentTerrier (and friends)20:37, 1 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Parallel Sailor Moon (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)

Extremely unnotable short story included within a Sailor Moon artbook. No significant coverage in any reliable sources. The single book reference is only a reference to idea that women of house should be able to manage the finances. Entire work is a double plot summary of a short 19 page manga omake. It fails WP:FICT, WP:N (verifiability of existance is not enough to say its notable), WP:V, and the artbook itself fails WP:BOOK. The anime and manga project generally does not include omake and other shorts like this in discussing series, as its a non-notable aspect of the work, so merging to Sailor Moon would not be appropriate, therefore this should simply be deleted. -- Collectonian (talk · contribs) 23:23, 24 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • Why? It has absolutely nothing to do with the chapters, nor are any of the variu sside-stories, etc particularly notable. Just being Sailor Moon oriented does not mean instant notability. It isn't notable at all. -- Collectonian (talk · contribs) 00:52, 25 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • It's included in the rereleased manga volumes, as you can see at the list of chapters. I agree that it's not notable enough to support an entire article, but it should redirect to the one other article that mentions its existence. --Masamage 01:23, 25 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • It doesn't even warrant a mention in the chapter list. Its only mentioned now because the chapter list is in serious need of clean up. -- Collectonian (talk · contribs) 03:59, 25 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • The art books are mentioned in the main article. Their detailed contents d not need to be discussed/mentioned/named. Again, at most a note that in artbook X, some additional short stories were included. A full blown article is excessive, and it has absolutely nothing to do with the actual chapters nor volume of the manga series itself. Merging it there would just be glutting the list with unrelated stuff. -- Collectonian (talk · contribs) 04:23, 25 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oh, sure, I don't think everything from this article should be merged in, or even close to that. Hecks no. But at least its title should appear somewhere, and in my opinion the short stories are just as deserving of brief (brief!) summaries as the chapters are, especially since some of them turned into movies or TV specials, and it would be weird to cover some and not the others. Mostly, though, what I'm arguing for is the redirect itself, and the preservation of the edit history. I don't really care what specific information gets put exactly where. --Masamage 04:36, 25 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • I don't that's an appropriate merge. Its an unnotable little short. It isn't a chapter and wasn't part of the original manga release at all. Being added as an extra in the re-releases, which are normally only mentioned in a single line in the lead, does not make it any more relevant. All we'll end up with is another cruddy mere like as done with the One Piece side stories were shoved into the One Piece chapter list. It has nothing to do with anything and it would be removed before the chapter list could ever go for FL status (not that its anywhere close to that now). -- Collectonian (talk · contribs) 03:59, 25 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • That's just your opinion, and I've given mine. It's a perfectly legitimate section for that page as it's a chapter of the manga, albeit a 外伝 chapter, and as long as it's mentioned that it was not in the original manga release, but a short released in a different series-related book, I don't see a problem mentioning it. I don't think everything in the current article needs to be included, but I see no legitimate reason to just wipe out the information altogether. Having a short section with information on it is useful and makes the information more complete. ···日本穣? · Talk to Nihonjoe 05:49, 25 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
FICT is still a valid reason for deletion, even if people figure that keeping it "in contention" ad infinite is a way to avoid its use. Its still backed by WP:N. There is nothing to merge. It is not a chapter of the original manga releases, so there is nothing to mention. -- Collectonian (talk · contribs) 15:46, 25 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
No, WP:FICT is not a valid reason for deletion - it is not backed by consensus, as is evidenced by it being in contention for months. Please remember to assume good faith, Collectonian - part of the problem with WP:FICT is that it has had to be largely rewritten, and gaining consensus for a rewritten guideline is difficult. The plot summary from Parallel Sailor Moon, properly pared, can be merged, and preserving the edit history via a redirect is important, per WP:MERGE to keep the terms of the GFDL. I'm surprised that you place so much importance on what is canon to the original release, when the Sailor Moon chapters page covers both the original release and the re-released edition. -Malkinann (talk) 22:53, 25 June 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.