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 redirect. Unfortunately no one really suggested a target so I am redirecting to Enemies in The Legend of Zelda series - but this article is being discussed at AfD, as well, so if an interested editor wants to change the target somewhere else, that is certainly acceptable. Shereth 17:58, 16 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Redead[edit]

Redead (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)

This is an article solely on a fictional enemy from The Legend of Zelda. This article cannot stand alone as it fails WP:FICT, and Enemies in The Legend of Zelda series covers it more than enough. It also has no sources. Artichoker^[talk] 01:38, 11 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Fails the general notability guideline. Nothing makes this particular enemy worth its own article. Note, however, that if there's a list of Zelda enemies with info missing about the Redead, a merge may be more appropriate. Red Phoenix ^{flame of life...protector of all...} 01:42, 11 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - it is not missing information, this link contains all the information on ReDeads that is needed. Artichoker^[talk] 01:44, 11 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This debate has been added to the list of video game related deletions. MrKIA11 (talk) 01:45, 11 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete and revert to the redirect from 2007. Not substantive enough for its own article. (ESkog)^(Talk) 01:55, 11 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Speedy redirect. Andre (talk) 02:21, 11 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect I must say the first time one of these things shrieked and latched onto me was a memorable moment for sure, but like most minor video-game enemies it's better merged than on its own. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 02:55, 11 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect - not notable enough on it's own --T-rex 03:09, 11 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect - I worked really hard on this article! Plus, I remember when this monster had a very large article, I promise that I will expand it and give a second chance...Who said to delete this anyway? -- User:linkandsonicx-11:53, 10 June 2008
• Redirect, not notable on its own. JIP | Talk 04:52, 11 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect - *update* I expanded the article big time! And in two days, I can upload photos, so please give it a chance, and check it out - ReDead. Talk 2:04, 11 June 2008
• Redirect - Please, please give the article a chance...it once did have an article, but I think I deleted it...So, please, give it a chance. Linkandsonicx (talk) 07:59, 11 June 2008 (UTC)Talk[reply]
• Delete Zef (talk) 15:51, 11 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

ReDeads are popular enemies for Zelda fans. And Octoroks? Or Stalfos? They don't even have their own articles! Its just plain sad! 76.97.95.228 (talk) 20:25, 11 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Redirect - Artichoker, your link does not contain all the info needed. I thought Wikipedia was supposed to have EVERY SINGLE BIT OF INFO POSSIBLE! By the way, I didn't play Majora's Mask much, so can someone add some MM info on ReDeads? 76.97.95.228 (talk) 20:30, 11 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Well, then you thought wrong. Wikipedia should only contain discriminant and notable information, see WP:NOT. And do you know what "redirect" means, because it seems like you are opting for the wrong thing, given your opinion. Artichoker^[talk] 20:44, 11 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment Then, what if I made a article which covers ReDeads, ReDead Knights and Gibdos, called "ReDeads and Gibdos" would you pleeeeease change your mind? Because merging them would made a awesome article. Linkandsonicx (talk) 22:09, 11 June 2008 (UTC)talk) 6:09, 11 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • As far as I am concerned everything about enemies is covered in Enemies in The Legend of Zelda series. There is simply no reason to make a new article about a couple of enemies that are already described in another article. Artichoker^[talk] 22:29, 11 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• CommentThey are given a summary, not a full explanation. Plus, the article would be a great resource, especially since it covers every little detail on the monsters. Linkandsonicx (talk) 23:58, 11 June 2008 (UTC) linkandsonicx[reply]
  • A summary is all that is needed. Once again, please see WP:NOT. Artichoker^[talk] 00:10, 12 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • There is nothing there that says "ReDeads are the most minor enemies in Zelda". Linkandsonicx (talk) 00:32, 12 June 2008 (UTC)linkandsonicx[reply]

• • I think it would be better if the List of Enemies includes a summary, then it has a link to a full article, depending on how much info the viewer needs. Linkandsonicx (talk) 00:42, 12 June 2008 (UTC)linkandsonicx[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.