Jump to content

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Professor Birch (recount)

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< Wikipedia:Articles for deletion
This is an old revision of this page, as edited by R. fiend (talk | contribs) at 16:29, 17 March 2005 (→[[Professor Birch]]). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Professor Birch

Is this or is this not the ultimate proof that there is an irrefutably heavy bias towards inclusion of Pokémon-related articles? Please discuss. --GRider\talk 18:07, 14 Mar 2005 (UTC)

  • Delete. Pokécruft. Android79 18:50, Mar 14, 2005 (UTC)
  • This appears to be a direct extension of Wikipedia:Deletion policy/Nintendo items. The discussion is still active but appears to be favoring a merge unless the item can show notability outside the game. --Allen3 19:07, Mar 14, 2005 (UTC)
    • Comment. That is incorrect; Professor Birch is not a Nintendo item, the discussion is unrelated. --GRider\talk 19:28, 14 Mar 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep, merge if you must. Why have you listed this again anyway? Xezbeth 19:21, Mar 14, 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep Well-known character in a very popular cartoon & game series. 3,180 Google Hits as "Prof. Birch" and a further 597 as "Professor Birch". Come on, now... the previous VfD ended less than 2 weeks ago and was only tallied yesterday! Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 19:53, Mar 14, 2005 (UTC)
    • It was tallied with, quote: 9 clear "delete" votes, 3 clear "keep" votes and 3 clear "merge" votes. Odd, isn't it? --GRider\talk 20:28, 14 Mar 2005 (UTC)
      • So the reason that this article was re-nominated a scant 11 hours after its previous deletion discussion was closed was that 9 is not a multiple of two. Uncle G 10:43, 2005 Mar 15 (UTC)
  • Delete, not notable. Grue 20:23, 14 Mar 2005 (UTC)
  • Merge, and as for Average Earthman's retort below, we can create a disambiguation when and if another Professor Birch gets an article. Meelar (talk) 21:21, Mar 14, 2005 (UTC)
  • Hmm I should just vote clear Keep to make it easier for vote talliers. While there is clear bias towards pokemons vs other -mons and suchlike, this article isn't a particularly good demonstration of that. Kappa 21:50, 14 Mar 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep, as per starblind. Also keep out respect for the result of the last vfd. DaveTheRed 21:51, 14 Mar 2005 (UTC)
    • It could be argued that the solution most likely to garner acceptance would be a merger with a larger topic...I'm not sure if a flat "keep" is respecting the last VfD when there were only 3 keep opinions and more than half the voters wanted the article deleted outright. --TenOfAllTrades | Talk 21:59, 14 Mar 2005 (UTC)
      • WP:GVFD#Votes. There were 6 keep opinions, and 9/15 is less than 2/3. Uncle G 10:43, 2005 Mar 15 (UTC)
      • Or one could also argue that since the end result of the last vfd was to keep, we should honor that instead. But really, I would accept a merge too. DaveTheRed 07:04, 15 Mar 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete or merge. --TenOfAllTrades | Talk 21:59, 14 Mar 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete, not notable, pokecruft. Megan1967 05:38, 15 Mar 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete, nn fancruft. ComCat 07:30, 15 Mar 2005 (UTC)
  • There were 9 deletes and three merges to 3 keeps, so it got kept? I don't get it. My personal opinion is to Delete still, but I'd suggest merge would be the reasonable compromise from the previous vote. Average Earthman 10:20, 15 Mar 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete as below. The page should have been deleted or merged before. Martg76 17:40, 15 Mar 2005 (UTC)
  • Merge and redirect. -Sean Curtin 06:17, Mar 16, 2005 (UTC)
Original discussion below:

This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was ambiguous.

I count 9 clear "delete" votes, 3 clear "keep" votes and 3 clear "merge" votes. The opinion of the nominator is, in this case, ambigous. While there is a clear majority to delete, there is not the overwhelming concensus necessary to carry out deletion. The decision defaults to keep for now. Rossami (talk) 07:17, 13 Mar 2005 (UTC)

More pseudo-professor-cruft? Are stubs regarding non-existent and fictitious professors inherently encyclopedic? With 280 unique google hits [1] what makes this "person" notable? Does Wikipedia hold a biased and lower standard for inclusion of Pokémon professors than they would for actual professors of note in the real world? Discuss. GRider\talk

  • Delete, minor fictious character, pokemon fancruft. Megan1967 01:21, 25 Feb 2005 (UTC)
  • Merge to a page on Pokemon characters. -Sean Curtin 03:54, Feb 25, 2005 (UTC)
  • No reason not to merge. Meelar (talk)
  • Delete: fancruft. Wile E. Heresiarch 07:54, 25 Feb 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete. Not notable info. ComCat 09:02, 25 Feb 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete. Pokecruft. --Bucephalus 14:34, 25 Feb 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete. Non-noteable fancruft. Martg76 19:34, 25 Feb 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep. Birch is a very notable character in the Pokémon universe, as, like Oak, Elm, and Ivy, the character sets up the premise of most of AG. kelvSYC 17:53, 26 Feb 2005 (UTC)
  • Merge to a page about Pokémon professors. Sinistro 00:20, 27 Feb 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep c.f. Professor Oak. This page can presumeably be expanded.--ZayZayEM 12:47, 28 Feb 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete. Non-notable fancruft. Indrian 04:33, Mar 1, 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep The Recycling Troll 09:40, 1 Mar 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete. More pokemon fancruft. Maybe merbe a sentence or two somewhere. This pokemon crap needs serious cleaning up. -R. fiend 17:57, 1 Mar 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete pokecruft. —Korath (Talk) 05:48, Mar 2, 2005 (UTC)
  • So if an article gets 10 delete votes, 10 merge votes, and 1 keep vote, it's kept because there was no consensus to delete? That makes no sense. A merge vote should not be treated exactly the same as a keep vote because they are not the same vote. Delete this, or failing that, merge, which is probably what should have been done initially, as a compromise between keep and delete. -R. fiend 16:29, 17 Mar 2005 (UTC)

This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Professor_Birch_(recount)&oldid=11214418"