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.
Deleteor Redirect to
Princess Daisy. Non-notable, fails GNG.
WP:VG/RS has only 3 total results for "Sarasaland", "Sarasaland Kingdoms", or other variations I tried. 1 was a misfire, the results were from the comment section. One was a "top 5 characters we'd like to see more of" type list, which mentioned it only in passing in connection to Princess Daisy. The last one was user uploaded fan art tagged on the same site as the one with the comments. There is essentially zero coverage of this kingdom even within the video game focused media. Of the non-primary unreliable sources in the article.... Only two actually mention Sarasaland, and one of those is again in passing to Daisy. --
ferret (
talk)
18:42, 27 May 2021 (UTC)reply
Delete - it's a fictional location that's used very sparingly in the franchise. It absolutely does not meet the
WP:GNG. I would be absolutely floored if someone found significant coverage that showed independent notability.
Sergecross73msg me20:20, 27 May 2021 (UTC)reply
Delete - Minor fictional location (it really only was featured in a single game) without the coverage in reliable sources to pass the
WP:GNG. I would be against using it as a Redirect, as the term "Sarasaland Kingdoms" is not commonly used at all. Pretty much every source only refers to it simply as
Sarasaland, which already redirects to
Super Mario Land, so it is not a particularly useful search term.
Rorshacma (
talk)
20:58, 27 May 2021 (UTC)reply
Delete: I had initially typed up a redirect argument, but I agree with Rorshacma that this term is not commonly used and there is already a redirect for Sarasaland.
Aoba47 (
talk)
22:04, 27 May 2021 (UTC)reply
Delete: Non-notable fancruft which does not belong to an encyclopaedia. I think that a redirect can be considered if it is viable, as I think that the edit history should be saved if possible, but if a redirect is not viable, this should go. JavaHurricane16:35, 28 May 2021 (UTC)reply
Comment - Google Books doesn't seem to show any good quality secondary sources. Google News primarily produces false-positive results from listicles that are clearly either primarily discussing Super Mario Land or Princess Daisy and thus makes assessing available sources somewhat difficult. Google Scholar produces no results.
HumanBodyPiloter5 (
talk)
16:46, 29 May 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.
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.
Deleteor Redirect to
Princess Daisy. Non-notable, fails GNG.
WP:VG/RS has only 3 total results for "Sarasaland", "Sarasaland Kingdoms", or other variations I tried. 1 was a misfire, the results were from the comment section. One was a "top 5 characters we'd like to see more of" type list, which mentioned it only in passing in connection to Princess Daisy. The last one was user uploaded fan art tagged on the same site as the one with the comments. There is essentially zero coverage of this kingdom even within the video game focused media. Of the non-primary unreliable sources in the article.... Only two actually mention Sarasaland, and one of those is again in passing to Daisy. --
ferret (
talk)
18:42, 27 May 2021 (UTC)reply
Delete - it's a fictional location that's used very sparingly in the franchise. It absolutely does not meet the
WP:GNG. I would be absolutely floored if someone found significant coverage that showed independent notability.
Sergecross73msg me20:20, 27 May 2021 (UTC)reply
Delete - Minor fictional location (it really only was featured in a single game) without the coverage in reliable sources to pass the
WP:GNG. I would be against using it as a Redirect, as the term "Sarasaland Kingdoms" is not commonly used at all. Pretty much every source only refers to it simply as
Sarasaland, which already redirects to
Super Mario Land, so it is not a particularly useful search term.
Rorshacma (
talk)
20:58, 27 May 2021 (UTC)reply
Delete: I had initially typed up a redirect argument, but I agree with Rorshacma that this term is not commonly used and there is already a redirect for Sarasaland.
Aoba47 (
talk)
22:04, 27 May 2021 (UTC)reply
Delete: Non-notable fancruft which does not belong to an encyclopaedia. I think that a redirect can be considered if it is viable, as I think that the edit history should be saved if possible, but if a redirect is not viable, this should go. JavaHurricane16:35, 28 May 2021 (UTC)reply
Comment - Google Books doesn't seem to show any good quality secondary sources. Google News primarily produces false-positive results from listicles that are clearly either primarily discussing Super Mario Land or Princess Daisy and thus makes assessing available sources somewhat difficult. Google Scholar produces no results.
HumanBodyPiloter5 (
talk)
16:46, 29 May 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.