Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Blastoise (2nd nomination)

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 to List of generation I Pokémon#Blastoise. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 00:54, 17 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

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

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Lacks notability, and a lot of the Reception content is padded to give the impression of notability. Also lacks background info on its creation. Bryn (talk) (contributions) 00:43, 10 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 00:50, 10 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Video games-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 00:50, 10 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Weak Keep - Unlike other Pokemon that definitely has "weak" sources and trivial, even on Blastoise's article has trivial, I don't think his whole reception are worthless. 180.194.130.4 (talk) 01:27, 10 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Redirect, per reasons below. So sad to see one of the popular Pokemon's article to be redirected. Hoping someone can recreate him in the future, but I don't think Wikiproject Pokemon is active. 180.194.130.4 (talk) 03:34, 10 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • I mean, there's not nothing, but some of it is extremely tenuous. For example, someone nicknaming their kid Blastoise. That's not reception, it's just trivia. - Bryn (talk) (contributions) 01:35, 10 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - not nearly enough in-depth coverage to show any real world notability. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 02:17, 10 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect to List of generation I Pokémon#Blastoise with no prejudice against recreation. Currently fails GNG but if someone can make it show GNG I have no opposition to recreation. Link20XX (talk) 03:09, 10 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect to List of generation I Pokémon#Blastoise: Same statement as the other Pokemon AfDs, non-notable with no significant independent coverage. Redirect is preferred instead of outright deletion since it's a highly searched page. Curbon7 (talk) 03:20, 10 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect to List of generation I Pokémon#Blastoise, the article shows a total lack of WP:SIGCOV. Fails WP:GNG._{ZXCVBNM (TALK)} 17:43, 10 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect to List of generation I Pokémon#Blastoise per Link20XX and Curbon7. There has been significant coverage about the sale value of a rare Blastoise Pokémon card, so it needs to be mentioned on the List page. Haleth (talk) 01:45, 11 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect into the above list. There is no deep coverage by reliable secondary sources, nor any impact in the real world. --LoЯd ۞pεth 21:11, 12 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect per everyone else. There is a reason Wikipedia does not include separate articles about each individual Pokémon any more. JIP | Talk 23:28, 12 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep There is improvement in the sourcing ever since the article was listed for deletion. Leanne Sepulveda (talk) 10:41, 13 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Merge to List of generation I Pokémon#Blastoise. Not seeing how this meets GNG, coverage is mostly in passing or game-guidy, but some content can enrich the target list. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 13:36, 14 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Transwiki merge to wikibooks:Pokémon/Pokédex/Blastoise --Mbrickn (talk) 01:01, 15 July 2021 (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.