The result was merge to Sentinel (comics). I see that a lot of the argument here is about WP:IPCA which ... is tagged as an essay, so it's not clear whether it can be considered a widely shared opinion to the point of being a guideline/policy or simply one opinion among many. Even if treated as policy/guideline it's not clear that it would justify deletion here; the first line of thought is that one shouldn't split the article when it will be deleted as original research but there is no detailed argument as to why this list is original research and the second that the starter article should have been trimmed first but that does not automatically imply that a spinoff should be deleted if the article wasn't trimmed first (it's also not entirely clear whether the article was actually not trimmed).
The second line of argument is that there is no reason for the article to be split off from the main list as the article hosting it isn't close to the size limits, and that the content should thus be merged back. This argument has not been explicitly contested (Dream Focus's argument allows for the content to be kept in the main topic, Lightburst and Andrew Davidson are mostly contesting the WP:IPCA-based arguments and the nom is making a blank assertion that the content should be got rid off but with little explanation as to why) and has gained some support, and it seems to be (somewhat obliquely) grounded in WP:SIZERULE - which is a guideline. By headcount we are 3+1 merge, 1 delete, 1 redirect, 2+1 keep (the "+1" refers to Dream Focus, who by my reading is open to either outcome) and that plus the aforementioned arguments justifies a merger to satisfy both the arguments in favour of preserving the material in some way and those that it shouldn't take the form of a separate article. Thus, merge. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 21:37, 4 August 2019 (UTC)
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
Per WP:IPCA, spinouts like this are not allowed. The information should be pruned, not disposed of in a separate article. ZXCVBNM ( TALK) 17:38, 28 July 2019 (UTC)
A Sentinel appeared in a Danger Room simulation in Marvel Anime: X-Men.are not enough to make an exception to the long-standing "Don't make standalone 'In popular culture' articles". Andrew Davidson misrepresents (deliberately?) what IPCA says above, since before splitting out articles like this meaningless fancrufty mentions are supposed to be trimmed; additionally, Sentinel (comics) isn't even that long -- somewhat more than half the article text appears to currently be devoted to "In other media", and so that should have been trimmed before consensus was sought to create this fork article. Hijiri 88 ( 聖 やや) 23:20, 28 July 2019 (UTC)
The topic in question in this case is a comic book characterSo ... you don't even read the articles before auto-!voting "keep" in AFDs now? A quick glance at the article in question would have revealed that "Sentinel" is not the name of a character. Hijiri 88 ( 聖 やや) 03:46, 29 July 2019 (UTC)
However, it is important to use caution in splitting out such articles: [...] Attempt to pare the section down first. In some cases, the section is not so much a new article as it is just bloated. In others, the section should be split off, but paring down the section first will help the new article stand on its own.). The
A Sentinel appeared in a Danger Room simulation in Marvel Anime: X-Men.example I cited above (which also appears, verbatim, in Sentinel (comics)), as well as the fact that the difference in byte-count between the body of the subarticle and the current text of the main article's "In other media section" is about 20,000 vs. about 19,000, is proof that no such trimming was performed. Hijiri 88 ( 聖 やや) 03:44, 29 July 2019 (UTC)
Obscure X-Men Adaptation A showed Character B reading Document C, which, on a freeze-frame and close read, indicate that Sentinels exist in that adaptation's universe.-type mentions should have been trimmed to see if the section was still too long then. I'm not even saying that the section was/is too long to stay in the main article (I don't think that), just that anyone who does think that should have trimmed that content before deciding to split the article. Hijiri 88 ( 聖 やや) 02:54, 30 July 2019 (UTC)
The result was merge to Sentinel (comics). I see that a lot of the argument here is about WP:IPCA which ... is tagged as an essay, so it's not clear whether it can be considered a widely shared opinion to the point of being a guideline/policy or simply one opinion among many. Even if treated as policy/guideline it's not clear that it would justify deletion here; the first line of thought is that one shouldn't split the article when it will be deleted as original research but there is no detailed argument as to why this list is original research and the second that the starter article should have been trimmed first but that does not automatically imply that a spinoff should be deleted if the article wasn't trimmed first (it's also not entirely clear whether the article was actually not trimmed).
The second line of argument is that there is no reason for the article to be split off from the main list as the article hosting it isn't close to the size limits, and that the content should thus be merged back. This argument has not been explicitly contested (Dream Focus's argument allows for the content to be kept in the main topic, Lightburst and Andrew Davidson are mostly contesting the WP:IPCA-based arguments and the nom is making a blank assertion that the content should be got rid off but with little explanation as to why) and has gained some support, and it seems to be (somewhat obliquely) grounded in WP:SIZERULE - which is a guideline. By headcount we are 3+1 merge, 1 delete, 1 redirect, 2+1 keep (the "+1" refers to Dream Focus, who by my reading is open to either outcome) and that plus the aforementioned arguments justifies a merger to satisfy both the arguments in favour of preserving the material in some way and those that it shouldn't take the form of a separate article. Thus, merge. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 21:37, 4 August 2019 (UTC)
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
Per WP:IPCA, spinouts like this are not allowed. The information should be pruned, not disposed of in a separate article. ZXCVBNM ( TALK) 17:38, 28 July 2019 (UTC)
A Sentinel appeared in a Danger Room simulation in Marvel Anime: X-Men.are not enough to make an exception to the long-standing "Don't make standalone 'In popular culture' articles". Andrew Davidson misrepresents (deliberately?) what IPCA says above, since before splitting out articles like this meaningless fancrufty mentions are supposed to be trimmed; additionally, Sentinel (comics) isn't even that long -- somewhat more than half the article text appears to currently be devoted to "In other media", and so that should have been trimmed before consensus was sought to create this fork article. Hijiri 88 ( 聖 やや) 23:20, 28 July 2019 (UTC)
The topic in question in this case is a comic book characterSo ... you don't even read the articles before auto-!voting "keep" in AFDs now? A quick glance at the article in question would have revealed that "Sentinel" is not the name of a character. Hijiri 88 ( 聖 やや) 03:46, 29 July 2019 (UTC)
However, it is important to use caution in splitting out such articles: [...] Attempt to pare the section down first. In some cases, the section is not so much a new article as it is just bloated. In others, the section should be split off, but paring down the section first will help the new article stand on its own.). The
A Sentinel appeared in a Danger Room simulation in Marvel Anime: X-Men.example I cited above (which also appears, verbatim, in Sentinel (comics)), as well as the fact that the difference in byte-count between the body of the subarticle and the current text of the main article's "In other media section" is about 20,000 vs. about 19,000, is proof that no such trimming was performed. Hijiri 88 ( 聖 やや) 03:44, 29 July 2019 (UTC)
Obscure X-Men Adaptation A showed Character B reading Document C, which, on a freeze-frame and close read, indicate that Sentinels exist in that adaptation's universe.-type mentions should have been trimmed to see if the section was still too long then. I'm not even saying that the section was/is too long to stay in the main article (I don't think that), just that anyone who does think that should have trimmed that content before deciding to split the article. Hijiri 88 ( 聖 やや) 02:54, 30 July 2019 (UTC)