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. Spartaz Humbug! 03:38, 29 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Silverbolt (Beast Wars)

[edit]
Silverbolt (Beast Wars) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log • AfD statistics)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Non-notable fictional character sourced only to primary sources and thus fails WP:GNG. A merge to a minor characters list is usually appropriate here but none appears to exist. Horrible non-free violation as well. Macr86 (talk) 03:07, 12 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ahem:

...it is important to realize that countering the keep or delete arguments of other people, or dismissing them outright, by simply referring them to this essay is not encouraged

— Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions
. NotARealWord (talk) 18:36, 12 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment that doesn't make the reasoning for deletion any more valid. J Milburn made an invalid arguement as to why something should be deleted. Divebomb merely pointed it out to him in an unrecommended manner. They are not the same thing.Mathewignash (talk) 18:54, 12 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment To address one of your issues, the link to the page on Jetstorm that doesn't mention "Silverbolt", if you read the article, you will note that for a time Silverbolt went by the name Jetstorm. So this is an article talking about him. Mathewignash (talk) 10:56, 14 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Spartaz Humbug! 13:57, 21 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Sock of banned user. –MuZemike 23:35, 23 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - Perhaps he means the deleted page for Silverbolt, which was also lacking enough notability. Maybe we should author a single page for both Silverbolts, with all the citations on both, and see if THAT has enough notabiliity! Mathewignash (talk) 22:05, 23 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Besides being heroic Transformers named Silverbolt who are the team flyers in their series, and being silver, and being made on Earth in the second season of their series... wait a minute... which is which again? Mathewignash (talk) 23:38, 23 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Come on now, G1 Silverbolt was afraid of heights, he led a team of sentient jets, was a combiner, and had no love interest. Neither were actually the "team flyers" in their series, when BW silverbolt debuted other Maximals could already fly, and G1 Silverbolt was part of a team of flyers. Neither of them were built on earth. NotARealWord (talk) 23:41, 23 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Silverbolt was built on Earth in the Marvel Comics. Mathewignash (talk) 02:20, 24 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
That's just one silverbolt, not both. Still, it is no more appropriate to cover the Fuzor and the aerialbot in the same article than it is to cover Megatron (Beast Era) with the original Megatron. Indeed, the Megatrons have more in common than the two Silverbolts honestly. NotARealWord (talk) 10:00, 24 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thing is if this one ends up being as KEEP, then he's the only Transformers character named Silverbolt who would have a page on Wikipedia, so he should probably be moved to Silverbolt (Transformers). Then once he's there I would probably add a mention of the Generation 1 character, or at least a link to the Aerialbots article. Mathewignash (talk) 18:21, 27 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • They are publications aimed at a fan audience. And "available on amazon.com and at your local library system" does not necessarily mean a scholarly or reliable source. I would suggest that The Unofficial Guide to Transformers 1980s Through 1990s Revised & Expanded 2nd Edition is neither. HrafnTalkStalk(P) 17:45, 26 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thank goodness then he wrote that book 6 years BEFORE he was hired by Fun Publications. You have to judge a source by when it was written, and it was written by someone who didn't work for Fun Publications. Mathewignash (talk) 14:48, 27 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • That website you pointed to is inactive. The community that uilt it up until 5000+ articles left wikia and put up a new site on a different server. Plus, it's article format would mean that it should not accept Wikipedia's articles. The new site also won't accept Wikipedia articles. NotARealWord (talk) 00:46, 28 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
They already have an article there. http://transformers.wikia.com/wiki/Silverbolt_(BW) And its still active. 7,452 pages on their wiki. Thousands of people a month still visit this article [4] on Wikipedia though, and no telling how many have seen it total over the years. But Wikipedia has unfortunately changed. The evil snotty elitist deletionists have won. Why just nominate all remaining Transformer articles at once, and kill them off like that, instead of wasting time picking them off one at a time or in small groups? Dream Focus 01:59, 28 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
If you have an opinion on this article, feel free to voice it. Mathewignash (talk) 10:54, 28 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Ahem, if you actually check, transformers.wikia.com is not growin fast enouh compared to all the new Transformers material coming out. Compare to the much more complete tfwiki.net. More than 11,000 articles and an active editorship that usually know what they're doing. NotARealWord (talk) 16:57, 28 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Forgive me for being unaware of the most active and up to date compendium on knowledge of the Transformers. Transwiki it wherever you want, I don't care. It just doesn't belong here. Trust me, I know. After all, I'm just one of the many unreasonable vicious hordes of deletionists trying to destroy yet another decent legitimate article. SnottyWong talk 17:35, 28 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I seriously don't think there is any place to transwiki this stuff. NotARealWord (talk) 18:12, 28 December 2010 (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.
More