This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject Cartoon Network, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles relating to
Cartoon Network on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Cartoon NetworkWikipedia:WikiProject Cartoon NetworkTemplate:WikiProject Cartoon NetworkCartoon Network articles
This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject Television, a collaborative effort to develop and improve Wikipedia articles about
television programs. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page where you can
join the discussion.TelevisionWikipedia:WikiProject TelevisionTemplate:WikiProject Televisiontelevision articles
This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject Animation, a collaborative effort to build an encyclopedic guide to
animation on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can
the article attached to this page, help out with the
open tasks, or contribute to the
discussion.AnimationWikipedia:WikiProject AnimationTemplate:WikiProject AnimationAnimation articles
This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject Fictional characters, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
fictional characters on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Fictional charactersWikipedia:WikiProject Fictional charactersTemplate:WikiProject Fictional charactersfictional character articles
Notability
On reviewing
WP:FICTION, I believe that this article would not stand up to a notability test. As a result, any sourced content should be merged back into the
Dethklok article (and the rest permanently removed). Wikipedia is
not a fan site. —
XSG22:54, 15 July 2008 (UTC)reply
I agree,
Wikipedia:FICTION#Derivative articles says that a character page should be individually notable on its own. I don't think any of these are. There's enough info on the main
Dethklok page about each character, without getting into specific minutiae. All five of these pages seem to serve as a way to write down every little thing about every character (see
Toki Wartooth for a particularly bad example of this), just for the sake of doing so, probably giving it
undue weight and a lot of this is unsourced. Can anyone give a good reason this should stay? If not, I'll probably nominate these for AfD, as I really don't think they should exist.
MrMoustacheMM (
talk)
23:18, 12 October 2010 (UTC)reply
Redirects are a good idea, fixed up some of the individual redirects to their specific character at Dethklok#Member Name. If we continue to have reverts on these pages to old versions, it might be a good idea to actually delete the articles (so there's nothing to revert to) and then re-create them as simple redirects. But we'll cross that bridge if it becomes necessary.
MrMoustacheMM (
talk)
16:45, 17 October 2010 (UTC)reply
References
Every fact stated in a Wikipedia article should be attributed back to a secondary source. Please let me know if it would be helpful to add {{fact}} templates to a section of the article in order to provide a better understanding of where references should appear. —
XSG22:54, 15 July 2008 (UTC)reply
This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject Cartoon Network, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles relating to
Cartoon Network on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Cartoon NetworkWikipedia:WikiProject Cartoon NetworkTemplate:WikiProject Cartoon NetworkCartoon Network articles
This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject Television, a collaborative effort to develop and improve Wikipedia articles about
television programs. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page where you can
join the discussion.TelevisionWikipedia:WikiProject TelevisionTemplate:WikiProject Televisiontelevision articles
This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject Animation, a collaborative effort to build an encyclopedic guide to
animation on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can
the article attached to this page, help out with the
open tasks, or contribute to the
discussion.AnimationWikipedia:WikiProject AnimationTemplate:WikiProject AnimationAnimation articles
This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject Fictional characters, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
fictional characters on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Fictional charactersWikipedia:WikiProject Fictional charactersTemplate:WikiProject Fictional charactersfictional character articles
Notability
On reviewing
WP:FICTION, I believe that this article would not stand up to a notability test. As a result, any sourced content should be merged back into the
Dethklok article (and the rest permanently removed). Wikipedia is
not a fan site. —
XSG22:54, 15 July 2008 (UTC)reply
I agree,
Wikipedia:FICTION#Derivative articles says that a character page should be individually notable on its own. I don't think any of these are. There's enough info on the main
Dethklok page about each character, without getting into specific minutiae. All five of these pages seem to serve as a way to write down every little thing about every character (see
Toki Wartooth for a particularly bad example of this), just for the sake of doing so, probably giving it
undue weight and a lot of this is unsourced. Can anyone give a good reason this should stay? If not, I'll probably nominate these for AfD, as I really don't think they should exist.
MrMoustacheMM (
talk)
23:18, 12 October 2010 (UTC)reply
Redirects are a good idea, fixed up some of the individual redirects to their specific character at Dethklok#Member Name. If we continue to have reverts on these pages to old versions, it might be a good idea to actually delete the articles (so there's nothing to revert to) and then re-create them as simple redirects. But we'll cross that bridge if it becomes necessary.
MrMoustacheMM (
talk)
16:45, 17 October 2010 (UTC)reply
References
Every fact stated in a Wikipedia article should be attributed back to a secondary source. Please let me know if it would be helpful to add {{fact}} templates to a section of the article in order to provide a better understanding of where references should appear. —
XSG22:54, 15 July 2008 (UTC)reply