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 to Space Channel 5. — Coren ^(talk) 04:12, 18 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ulala[edit]

This character does not assert notability outside of the its video game appearances. It is unlikely that any third party sources will ever talk about it outside of the context of the games (other than the lawsuit, which is already covered in better detail within the main article), so it has no reason to exist. TTN (talk) 12:50, 13 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of video game related deletions. TTN (talk) 12:52, 13 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect/Merge to Space Channel 5, where all the pertinent information is. Nifboy (talk) 16:12, 13 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete for the inability to find reliable third-party sources, thus failing to meet our notability guideline. Randomran (talk) 18:08, 13 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Weak redirect to Space Channel 5. The series is marginally popular but I don't see a lot of potential for a breakout article. JuJube (talk) 22:45, 13 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Well, this is my first comment in one of these, so please bear with me, but anyway, I say we should keep this article due to coverage in third party sources, the out of universe information about the design controversy, the nice presentation of the article with an effective use of imagery and organization, and that it concerns a character who has appeared in multiple games including one called Sega Superstars Tennis. Superstars = notable! --Elisabeth Rogan (talk) 06:08, 14 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Fucking strong keep because, well, she's a video game character. Don't they deserve articles? --TONO459 (talk) 10:48, 14 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- No, they don't per se. – sgeureka ^t•c 11:08, 14 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment Some do, some don't. It depends on whether they meet our policies and guidelines. This one, in particular, lacks reliable third-party sources, and fails to meet our notability guideline, which is supported by the broader Wikipedia community. The best way to save it is to find sources that offer significant coverage, enough to write a non-stub article. Randomran (talk) 15:02, 14 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Merge somewhere into Space Channel 5. Some real-world information (good), but nothing really non-trivial (bad). Not enough for a spinout article. – sgeureka ^t•c 11:08, 14 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Space Channel 5, which isn't really excessively long. Stifle (talk) 16:14, 14 September 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.