WIKIPEDIA:WIKIPROJECT DELETION SORTING FICTIONAL ELEMENTS

Shortcuts

This is a collection of discussions on the deletion of articles related to Fictional elements. It is one of many deletion lists coordinated by WikiProject Deletion sorting. Anyone can help maintain the list on this page.

Adding a new AfD discussion

Adding an AfD to this page does not add it to the main page at WP:AFD. Similarly, removing an AfD from this page does not remove it from the main page at WP:AFD. If you want to nominate an article for deletion, go through the process on that page before adding it to this page. To add a discussion to this page, follow these steps:

Edit this page and add {{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PageName}} to the top of the list. Replace "PageName" with the relevant article name, i.e. the one on the existing AFD discussion. Also, indicate the title of the article in the edit summary as it is particularly helpful to add a link to the article in the edit summary. When you save the page, the discussion will automatically appear.
You should also tag the AfD by adding {{subst:delsort|Fictional elements|~~~~}} to it, which will inform editors that it has been listed here. You may place this tag above or below the nomination statement or at the end of the discussion thread.

Note that there are a few scripts and tools that can make this easier.

Removing a closed AfD discussion

Closed AfD discussions are automatically removed by a bot.

Other types of discussions

You can also add and remove links to other discussions ( prod, CfD, TfD etc.) related to Fictional elements.

Further information

For further information see Wikipedia's deletion policy and WP:AfD for general information about Articles for Deletion, including a list of article deletions sorted by day of nomination.

Archived discussions (starting from September 2007) may be found at:

Purge page cache

watch

The guideline Wikipedia:Manual of Style (writing about fiction) and essay Wikipedia:Notability (fiction) may be relevant here.

Related deletion sorting

Fictional elements

Poseidon (fictional ship)

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

Only sourced to the novel itself and the article is only plot with no real-world commentary, besides from its comparison to RMS Queen Mary. Neocorelight ( Talk) 09:25, 28 April 2024 (UTC) reply

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Fictional elements, Literature, and Film. Neocorelight ( Talk) 09:25, 28 April 2024 (UTC) reply
Delete - seems like this is not independently notable, but please ping me if good sources are identified. Maybe some of the content could be added to The Poseidon Adventure (novel), although that article is currently only sourced to the book itself. Regards, BennyOnTheLoose ( talk) 21:57, 28 April 2024 (UTC) reply

Courtney Woods

AfDs for this article:

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

Non-notable character, incredibly minor side character who appears as in three episodes. Fails WP:NCHARACTER and GNG Questions? four Olifanofmrtennant (she/her) 04:09, 28 April 2024 (UTC) reply

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women, Fictional elements, and Science fiction and fantasy. Questions? four Olifanofmrtennant (she/her) 04:09, 28 April 2024 (UTC) reply
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:18, 28 April 2024 (UTC) reply
Questions Not so sure, there are some sources. Would this publication count as a reliable source? Likewise the character appears in Women in Doctor Who: Damsels, Feminists and Monsters, but I cannot see the extent. Can anyone else? There's also Gender and the Quest in British Science Fiction Television, pp. 186, 206-207, [1] and [2]. Daranios ( talk) 09:08, 28 April 2024 (UTC) reply
That pdf appears to be a student paper, so I would say no. What Culture is unreliable and that Digital Spy listicle is just a basic plot summary. The second book doesnt seem great either. Questions? four Olifanofmrtennant (she/her) 11:56, 28 April 2024 (UTC) reply
Delete not notable character. Indagate ( talk) 13:58, 28 April 2024 (UTC) reply
Merge to, I guess, List of Doctor Who supporting characters or keep. I don't quite agree that Gender and the Quest... "doesnt seem great either", and we have the short reception section already, so I am on the fence about notability as long as I don't get more input about Women in Doctor Who or additional sources. In any case, even if this character should not be notable in it's own right, we still have this reception section based on secondary sources which should be WP:PRESERVEd, not lost in deletion. No advantage for the reader whatsoever there.
Keep, based on Daranios finding coverage in two books published by the reputable McFarland & Company press. There is also coverage of the character in this PhD dissertation. Hydrangeans ( she/her | talk | edits) 08:27, 29 April 2024 (UTC) reply

List of Ultraman Blazar characters

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

It does not seem like the characters of this show are discussed in any reliable sources individually or as a group. This article uses primary sources exclusively, and I could not find any good sources in my BEFORE check. The one interwiki link also had little of use. QuicoleJR ( talk) 21:52, 25 April 2024 (UTC) reply

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Science fiction and fantasy, Television, and Japan. QuicoleJR ( talk) 21:52, 25 April 2024 (UTC) reply
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 21:55, 25 April 2024 (UTC) reply
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. QuicoleJR ( talk) 22:45, 25 April 2024 (UTC) reply
Delete. No evidence that this needs to be created. Several character creations also show that all of those aren't reliable also and have been sourced primarily. 🥒 Greenish Pickle!🥒 ( 🔔) 02:55, 26 April 2024 (UTC) reply
Reject: This article wre under copyright law. Harimua Thailand ( talk) 04:18, 26 April 2024 (UTC) reply
UNO REVERSE. 🥒 Greenish Pickle!🥒 ( 🔔) 06:13, 26 April 2024 (UTC) reply

Richard Bellamy (Upstairs, Downstairs)

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

Unsourced since 2016, nothing found via WP:BEFORE. (Oinkers42) ( talk) 17:05, 25 April 2024 (UTC) reply

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Fictional elements and Television. (Oinkers42) ( talk) 17:05, 25 April 2024 (UTC) reply

Delete per nom. Couldn't find WP:SIGCOV via WP:BEFORE. Shooterwalker ( talk) 21:45, 25 April 2024 (UTC) reply
Comment if not kept, the more appropriate merge target seems to be List of Upstairs, Downstairs (1971 TV series) characters as he is not mentioned at List of Upstairs Downstairs (2010 TV series) characters, and the text of the article supports this. On a brief look, it actually appears there's not much more at this article than the character list. Jclemens ( talk) 23:47, 25 April 2024 (UTC) reply
Redirect to List of Upstairs, Downstairs (1971 TV series) characters#Richard Bellamy. Redirects are cheap. Clarityfiend ( talk) 01:49, 26 April 2024 (UTC) reply
Redirect to List of Upstairs, Downstairs (1971 TV series) characters#Richard Bellamy. Doesn't appear to be independently notable. Regards, BennyOnTheLoose ( talk) 17:16, 26 April 2024 (UTC) reply
Redirect As pointed above. Doesn't meet GNG and lacks any sig cov whatsoever. X ( talk) 23:48, 28 April 2024 (UTC) reply

C.I.D. Investigators

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

No refs on the page for many years and WP:NOTPLOT. Could redirect to List of Catch-22 characters as AtD JMWt ( talk) 09:34, 25 April 2024 (UTC) reply

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. JMWt ( talk) 09:34, 25 April 2024 (UTC) reply
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:45, 25 April 2024 (UTC) reply

Delete WP:NOTPLOT and WP:SIGCOV both apply if this hasn't earned enough reception in reliable independent sources. Older books like this can sometimes have hidden coverage deep in other print sources, but WP:BEFORE indicates there isn't enough to separate this topic from the main book article. Shooterwalker ( talk) 21:44, 25 April 2024 (UTC) reply

David Xanatos

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

Fails WP:GNG. WP:BEFORE shows that most of the sources were from the film, except this [3]. But, that is not enough for the character. 🥒 Greenish Pickle!🥒 ( 🔔) 04:19, 24 April 2024 (UTC) reply

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Fictional elements, Science fiction and fantasy, and Television. 🥒 Greenish Pickle!🥒 ( 🔔) 04:19, 24 April 2024 (UTC) reply
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Comics and animation-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:42, 24 April 2024 (UTC) reply
Keep The topic does not need to be the main subject to "count" with regard to notability. In my view, the mentioned Polygon article, this IGN article and the appearance in The Tropes of Fantasy Fiction, together with briefer appearances like here, establish enough material and commentary to fulfill the requirements of WP:WHYN and WP:ALLPLOT, and therefore establish notability. Daranios ( talk) 07:20, 25 April 2024 (UTC) reply

Night Hawk (comics)

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

I initially WP:PRODed this article with the following rationale: "Non-notable fictional character. None of the current references are reliable, secondary sources. Searches just turned up very trivial mentions - no significant coverage in reliable sources." It was later de-prodded, with the suggestion that a full discussion should be held due to the subject being a pre-internet subject, so I am bringing it to AFD. To give further details on my WP:BEFORE results, the only results I was able to find in actual reliable sources were extremely brief, usually just a sentence or two stating "An early example of this kind of character was Night Hawk" and that's about it, such as these two books. Rorshacma ( talk) 19:35, 23 April 2024 (UTC) reply

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Fictional elements, Comics and animation, and United Kingdom. Rorshacma ( talk) 19:35, 23 April 2024 (UTC) reply
A redirect/merge to the The Nelson Lee Library seems more sensible than deletion. I'm assuming you've checked the physical media covering British story papers, like Book & Magazine Collector, Boys Will Be Boys, etc., etc. rather than just using Google. BoomboxTestarossa ( talk) 21:18, 23 April 2024 (UTC) reply
Delete per nom. Couldn't find WP:SIGCOV. Would support a redirect if people can agree on a valid target. But it's an unlikely search term and deletion is also fine. Shooterwalker ( talk) 01:44, 24 April 2024 (UTC) reply
Merge and redirect to The Nelson Lee Library, agreeing with BoomboxTestarossa. We do have the mentioned secondary sources, which should count for something, but does not seem enough to be to establish stand-alone notability (I cannot see The British Superhero, p. 41, myself). So merge as WP:AtD. Daranios ( talk)
Merge to The Nelson Lee Library as preferred WP:ATD. ~ Kvng ( talk) 17:47, 27 April 2024 (UTC) reply

Ultraman Tregear

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

Most of it were just primary sources. Fails WP:GNG. AfD'ing it to end the edit war. 🥒 Greenish Pickle!🥒 ( 🔔) 22:46, 19 April 2024 (UTC) reply

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Fictional elements, Science fiction and fantasy, and Television. 🥒 Greenish Pickle!🥒 ( 🔔) 22:46, 19 April 2024 (UTC) reply

Reject: you have no reason to delete this article!! Harimua Thailand ( talk) 02:45, 21 April 2024 (UTC) reply

Why not? 2605:B40:13E7:F600:1566:1FAC:A05C:22B9 ( talk) 17:10, 21 April 2024 (UTC) reply

@ Harimua Thailand: We need coverage in reliable sources independent of the subject (in this case, Ultraman) to have an article. This article has none of that, and should therefore be deleted. Characters as popular as King Dedede have been redirected for this reason. QuicoleJR ( talk) 21:37, 23 April 2024 (UTC) reply

Except King Dedede is a different topic entirely and have some decent sources unlike this one (Full of primary sources).The Worst part is, there are other 3 Ultraman articles that are all sourced as primary. 🥒 Greenish Pickle!🥒 ( 🔔) 00:57, 24 April 2024 (UTC) reply

I know that, I was using him as an example of how notability is not popularity or being a well-liked character. The fact that he is in a better position than this character helps my point. QuicoleJR ( talk) 01:26, 24 April 2024 (UTC) reply

Delete There is literally no reception in reliable sources either in this article or on the web, so it does not meet GNG. If there is a good redirect target available, redirect it there. QuicoleJR ( talk) 21:33, 23 April 2024 (UTC) reply
~~Reject:~~ Redirect is not allowed and the article must be keep!! Harimua Thailand ( talk) 04:20, 26 April 2024 (UTC) reply
Why? 2605:B40:13E7:F600:6938:8399:70DC:2892 ( talk) 14:38, 26 April 2024 (UTC) reply

You made the article, you have serious bias ^48JCL
Talk 00:42, 27 April 2024 (UTC) reply

@ Harimua Thailand: You can only make 1 bolded vote per AFD. If you want to make another one, you must strike the old one. QuicoleJR ( talk) 00:37, 29 April 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗ plicit 00:09, 27 April 2024 (UTC) reply

Are people allowed to vote twice? Cooper ( talk) 01:52, 27 April 2024 (UTC) reply

No, they are not. QuicoleJR ( talk) 00:38, 29 April 2024 (UTC) reply

Keep: I was about to say redirect but if you search by the Japanese name, ウルトラマントレギア, a lot more sourcing comes up. Cooper ( talk) 01:54, 27 April 2024 (UTC) reply
See WP:THEREMUSTBESOURCES. 🥒 Greenish Pickle!🥒 ( 🔔) 01:56, 27 April 2024 (UTC) reply

Entry on Japanese Wikipedia. Cooper ( talk) 01:58, 27 April 2024 (UTC) reply
Its a primary source. 🥒 Greenish Pickle!🥒 ( 🔔) 01:59, 27 April 2024 (UTC) reply
Two quick searches brought me these two. Cooper ( talk) 02:04, 27 April 2024 (UTC) reply
Unreliable. See WP:RS, if there's a reliable source then it helps GNG. 🥒 Greenish Pickle!🥒 ( 🔔) 02:05, 27 April 2024 (UTC) reply
How do you know it's unreliable? Just because you aren't familiar with a website doesn't make it unreliable. I'm not familiar with those website either, but both of those websites are used dozens to hundreds of times on Wikipedia. And they look fine to me. Cooper ( talk) 02:07, 27 April 2024 (UTC) reply
If they are not unreliable, but a situational source. Then it couldn't even help WP:GNG. 🥒 Greenish Pickle!🥒 ( 🔔) 02:10, 27 April 2024 (UTC) reply
WP:GNG says that reliable "sources may encompass published works in all forms and media, and in any language." Let's not discriminate Japanese media. Cooper ( talk) 02:11, 27 April 2024 (UTC) reply
It's not even proven as a reliable source. But, lets drop this and move on since we have different perspective. 🥒 Greenish Pickle!🥒 ( 🔔) 02:13, 27 April 2024 (UTC) reply

That sounds like you're just trying to deny that any source is valid, for whatever reason occurs to you at the moment. I don't think there is such a thing as a "situational source". Toughpigs ( talk) 02:12, 27 April 2024 (UTC) reply
Because its just a reveal source. For the character it says only about this "Among the many Ultraman, Ultraman Taro is the one for whom I feel a powerful, powerful affinity" thats it. But, I don't see any point of making this discussion much longer. 🥒 Greenish Pickle!🥒 ( 🔔) 02:17, 27 April 2024 (UTC) reply
Uh, what is a "reveal source"? Cooper ( talk) 02:18, 27 April 2024 (UTC) reply
Oops. I meant that the source is a Character reveal only. 🥒 Greenish Pickle!🥒 ( 🔔) 02:19, 27 April 2024 (UTC) reply

Situational sources have been a thing on the site for a long time. QuicoleJR ( talk) 00:38, 29 April 2024 (UTC) reply
I'm guessing this? Thing is, "situational" seems to mean there can be red flags in some sources that would normally be reliable, like if they were writing about something out of the usual scope. I don't think that applies here. Coop ( talk) 07:09, 29 April 2024 (UTC) reply

Sephiroth

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

This disambiguation page doesn't really seem to have a use, given it only contains two subjects, Sefirot and Sephiroth, which can easily have a hatnote at the top of their articles to accomplish the same disambiguation purpose. Given that Sephiroth is the name, and not Sefirot, which is only a similar sounding word, I'd suggest reclassing Sephiroth (Final Fantasy) to just Sephiroth, and then keeping the hatnote that leads to Sefirot in the case that someone is looking for the concept. Overall, though, this page seems unneeded. Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 ( talk) 00:19, 15 April 2024 (UTC) reply

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Fictional elements, Video games, and Religion. Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 ( talk) 00:19, 15 April 2024 (UTC) reply
Delete per the above and WP:ONEOTHER. Jclemens ( talk) 01:00, 15 April 2024 (UTC) reply
Delete: WP:ONEOTHER and WP:DABPARTIAL. Unnecessary disambiguation page that can be resolved with a hatnote. Nothing else can logically be added to this. Agree with nom that Sephiroth is clearly the primary topic of the name so that article should be moved to Sephiroth without the disambiguator as well. StreetcarEnjoyer (talk) 01:13, 15 April 2024 (UTC) reply
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Disambiguations-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 01:24, 15 April 2024 (UTC) reply
Just FYI, there have been a few previous discussions relevant to explain why things are this way:

older ≠ wiser 02:37, 15 April 2024 (UTC) reply

Keep According to WikiNav there is no primary topic, and in fact more clicks go to Sefirot than the FF character. Therefore despite it seeming "obvious" to video game fans, it clearly has a different meaning to the greater public. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ ( ᴛ) 04:51, 15 April 2024 (UTC) reply
The primary topic for Sephiroth is not Sefirot, regardless of the relative pageviews. While they may be transliterating the same Hebrew term--and I'm not sure that's actually been established without looking into the FF character--similar but different names and content is exactly what hatnotes are for, isn't it? Jclemens ( talk) 04:56, 15 April 2024 (UTC) reply
Britannica clearly says that "Sephiroth" is an alternate name for Sefirot. I think it's highly likely the FF character's name was based on said mythology, also given the naming of Jenova, which resembles a certain Biblical name of God. Knowing this, both Sefirot and the FF character are viable topics for the term, and a DAB page is required. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ ( ᴛ) 06:24, 15 April 2024 (UTC) reply
Addendum: I also support redirect to Sefirot with a hatnote per longterm significance if that would allow for a consensus. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ ( ᴛ) 09:29, 23 April 2024 (UTC) reply
Keep per ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ. No primary topic so WP:ONEOTHER is satisfied by keeping the page. -- Necrothesp ( talk) 12:23, 15 April 2024 (UTC) reply
~~Delete~~ Redirect to Sefirot per ONEOTHER. If Sefirot is indeed the primary target, per ZXC, then Sephiroth should ~~be deleted and~~ become a redirect to Sefirot. There's no policy support for a two-page DAB. Axem Titanium ( talk) 18:07, 15 April 2024 (UTC) reply
I never said Sefirot was the primary target, but that there was no primary, though it might be arguable that Sefirot is primary by the longterm significance criterion. In that case, though, deletion is unnecessary, a primary redirect can simply be made. The main thing I am certain of is that the video game character is not primary, so there is zero scenario in which deletion of this page is merited.

DABs can certainly be 2 pages if there is no clear meaning of the word. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ ( ᴛ) 18:16, 15 April 2024 (UTC) reply
True, changed position. Saving thousands of people a DAB click per month is an end unto itself. Axem Titanium ( talk) 18:45, 15 April 2024 (UTC) reply
Delete and move Sephiroth (Final Fantasy) to here per nom. That's honestly the most logical choice.-- Kung Fu Man ( talk) 03:26, 16 April 2024 (UTC) reply
@ Kung Fu Man: Do you have a response to the WikiNav information showing that more people click through to Sefirot than to the FF character from here? Because it seems to indicate that making the character primary is the illogical choice. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ ( ᴛ) 05:51, 16 April 2024 (UTC) reply
@ Zxcvbnm: It could also be a sake of curiosity and is the top result Zx. I mean I know if I was looking up Sephiroth and the first thing I saw was that my curiosity would be piqued.-- Kung Fu Man ( talk) 06:52, 16 April 2024 (UTC) reply
Let's say that I had a gut feeling that 95% of the visitors to this page were actually looking for the religious term, but got distracted by the FF character and curiously clicked on that link instead. It might sound ludicrous, but if I asked for evidence to refute it, there is none. The only thing we know for certain is the relative pageviews, therefore similarly, that argument cannot be confirmed. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ ( ᴛ) 07:42, 16 April 2024 (UTC) reply
Zx you asked a question and I gave a response. Even WikiNav seems to indicate most of the results are coming from a search result. In any event, I'm standing by my decision on this. Even a basic search result on Google indicates that the fictional character is the primarily subject.-- Kung Fu Man ( talk) 12:48, 16 April 2024 (UTC) reply
Keep. After thinking about this a bit, this request is in essence a request to move Sephiroth (Final Fantasy) to Sephiroth although it is presented in the guise of discussing deletion of a ~~redirect~~ disambiguation page. As disambiguation is necessary, whether with through hatnotes or a disambiguation page, this page cannot be deleted until there is consensus to move established with a transparent and properly listed MOVE discussion (not through a backdoor AfD). And the watchers of Sephirot should be notified of the discussion. older ≠ wiser 17:08, 16 April 2024 (UTC) reply
Comment: I'm also OK with redirecting this to Sephirot with a hatnote to the Final Fantasy character. However, that same redirect was previously changed to a disambiguation page in this discussion. Pinging the participants: Steel1943, Dream Focus, Havradim. older ≠ wiser 17:06, 24 April 2024 (UTC) reply
Delete per WP:ONEOTHER. The disambiguation can be achieved with a hat note. Shooterwalker ( talk) 01:18, 17 April 2024 (UTC) reply
Delete per WP:ONEOTHER. The disambiguation can be achieved with a hat note. Yes, I copied Shooterwalker. The hatnote will redirect people just as easily or as well as this unnecessary twodab. ~~Unless someone can provide evidence this is an actual alternate name/spelling for Sefirot and not simply a similar word, the character should be moved over it.~~ I do see its noted as a transliteration in the lead, which my eyes refused to register earlier. -- ferret ( talk) 14:55, 17 April 2024 (UTC) reply
Delete. I guess hat note does work. 🥒 Greenish Pickle!🥒 ( 🔔) 22:24, 17 April 2024 (UTC) reply
Delete. There's already a hatnote, and it would make sense to have one. Basically saying "delete per WP:ONEOTHER." TWOrantula^TM ( enter the web) 01:01, 18 April 2024 (UTC) reply
Comment These delete arguments do not address the WP:SURPRISE issue when people - actually most searchers - are looking for a religious term and land on a Final Fantasy character. While the DAB page may not technically be required, WP:ONEOTHER is specifically for when a primary topic exists. The FF character is in no way a primary topic for this term. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ ( ᴛ) 17:31, 18 April 2024 (UTC) reply
Keep - while Sephirot is the usual English transliteration in Jewish Kabbalah, Sephiroth is the most common transliteration in Hermetic Qabalah for the same topic. Therefore a dab page should be maintained. Alternatively, redirect to Sephirot with a hatnote for the FF character. Skyerise ( talk) 19:26, 18 April 2024 (UTC) reply

Comment should Sefirot be deemed the primary topic, I'm fine with Sefirot instead being the primary redirect. However, the article should have a hatnote leading to the video game character given the similar titles. In any case, the disambig page is unnecessary given this can just be handled by hatnotes. Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 ( talk) 20:00, 18 April 2024 (UTC) reply
Redirect Sephiroth to Sefirot and add a hatnote to game character. Sefirot is the primary topic per WP:PT2 due to "long-term significance". -- Mika1h ( talk) 20:14, 18 April 2024 (UTC) reply
Redirect to Sefirot with a hatnote for Sephiroth. I feel like this isn't a Mario situation, where the character is so big that they get priority over the name. - Cukie Gherkin ( talk) 22:57, 22 April 2024 (UTC) reply
Delete: In order to move Sephiroth (Final Fantasy) to Sephiroth. Redirecting this to Sefirot because it doesn't seem that likely of a spelling mistake, and the current two disambiguation targets get around the same # of views. Cleo Cooper ( talk) 06:01, 23 April 2024 (UTC) reply
My mistake, it's not a spelling error. I still think Sephiroth (Final Fantasy) should be moved here, and a hatnote can be added for Sefirot. Cleo Cooper ( talk) 06:03, 23 April 2024 (UTC) reply
This is not about what first comes to mind, but about what is correct in policy. Moving the page clearly isn't. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ ( ᴛ) 09:27, 23 April 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Toadette^Edit! 21:19, 23 April 2024 (UTC) reply

Redirect to Sefirot, add a hatnote for Sephiroth (Final Fantasy), I don't think Sephiroth would get priority over the name due to Sefirot having significantly more long term significance than the character.- Samoht27 ( talk) 21:19, 23 April 2024
Redirect per above. MKsLifeInANutshell ( talk) 14:39, 24 April 2024 (UTC) reply

Comment: For what it's worth, straight-up "delete" is not applicable here since the title refers to at least one existent subject. (Otherwise, I do not have an opinion.) Steel1943 ( talk) 17:20, 24 April 2024 (UTC) reply

Redirect to Sefirot with a hatnote for Sephiroth (Final Fantasy), per Samoht27 and MKsLifeInANutshell. This is the only fully policy-compliant option, as there is a clear primary topic of this WP:TWODABS situation. BD2412 T 20:46, 24 April 2024 (UTC) reply

The Boss (Metal Gear)

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

The current sources at reception were just listicles and rankings. I tried to find any sources about this character per WP:BEFORE, but I cannot find any sigcov. Relying mostly with this single journal here [4] wouldn't help notability. Greenish Pickle! ( 🔔) 22:39, 12 April 2024 (UTC) reply

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Fictional elements and Video games. Greenish Pickle! ( 🔔) 22:39, 12 April 2024 (UTC) reply

Note: This discussion has been included in the Science fiction and fantasy. 🥒 Greenish Pickle!🥒 ( 🔔) 23:53, 18 April 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read!
Talk!} 22:47, 19 April 2024 (UTC) reply

Merge per Conyo. This article isn't meeting notability as of right now. Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 ( talk) 01:07, 24 April 2024 (UTC) reply

Merge to Characters of the Metal Gear series#Introduced in Metal Gear Solid 3: Snake Eater as an WP:ATD. I found a GameRant article [5] but not sure if this would really count. I'm also not sure if GameRant is reliable or not. Conyo14 ( talk) 03:12, 20 April 2024 (UTC) reply
It is situational as a source, but Valnet sources does not help notability according to WP:VG/RS. 🥒 Greenish Pickle!🥒 ( 🔔) 03:15, 20 April 2024 (UTC) reply
So, half a source. But my !vote shall remain merge. Conyo14 ( talk) 03:19, 20 April 2024 (UTC) reply
Merge per WP:ATD. There is some sourcing but it's questionable whether it reaches WP:SIGCOV. This can be covered at the main game article. Shooterwalker ( talk) 01:37, 24 April 2024 (UTC) reply
Keep. [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] She has also been discussed with sigcov in these lists: [11] [12] [13] [14] I have not looked into any book or scholar sources yet, nor have I checked Japanese sources. - Cukie Gherkin ( talk) 01:08, 25 April 2024 (UTC) reply
Personally, I think the Kotaku and IGN looks good, thou other sources doesn't really help GNG, but can also he used to improve the article further. So, I feel like the article is barely notable for now but is still in weak state. 🥒 Greenish Pickle!🥒 ( 🔔) 01:15, 25 April 2024 (UTC) reply
After checking further, I felt like I'm satisfied a bit with the sources that were brought here now. But, I'll let afd stay here let others state their opinions here. 🥒 Greenish Pickle!🥒 ( 🔔) 01:16, 25 April 2024 (UTC) reply
Keep I've decided to create a source analysis of Cukie's sources, and it has changed my !vote:

Source analysis by Conyo14

Source assessment by User:Conyo14
The Memory Card .15: Snake pulls the trigger	Plot WP:SUMMARY/brief routine mention of a plot. N
[15]	Brief analysis, but uncertain of reliability. Partial otherwise.
Breaking Down my Favorite Boss Fights of all Time	WP:BLOG N
Best Metal Gear Solid Boss of All Time Face-Off: The Winner Revealed	Although it is a ranking, there is enough to meet WP:SIGCOV Y
La legendaria soldado The Boss	Meristation is considered reliable and the article does not read like a blog. Y
The 10 Greatest Final Bosses in Video Games	Brief mention, not in-depth analysis.
The best boss fights involve getting picked on by someone your own size	WP:BLOG N
Seven Video Games Where You Beat Up Your Dad	Brief, but maybe on the line between partial and full. I'll put it as good. Y
The 25 most inspirational female characters in games	WP:ROUTINE N

Not that it matters to affecting your !vote, the Game Developer blog is one that was chosen as a featured blog by GD editorial staff, and the author is a published SME in gaming. As far as The Mary Sue goes, it is listed as a reliable source on WP:RSP. I also do not believe that the use of WP:ROUTINE is appropriate; none of the citations I listed are news sources, all of these sources were posted years after release, written (presumably) because the author wanted to write about it. The Destructoid source, for example, is written as part of a series of significant parts of video games for their staff, with the author saying things like "Shooting The Boss, while over in a blink of an eye, really is a pretty innovative and surprisingly memorable moment. While it could have easily been incorporated into the always impressive cutscenes, making one, small creative decision to have the player perform this final killing shot makes the scene infinitely more powerful" as well as discuss the relationship between the player, Snake, and The Boss, their musing over whether the player is required to kill her or just let her die, and speculation on what Kojima was intending to depict by making the player execute her. I would strongly dispute the notion that ROUTINE applies in any capacity here. WP:SUMMARY also applies to an extent, but not to the entirety. The source is being utilized not for the description of the plot of The Boss, but for the author's feelings on her and her death. - Cukie Gherkin ( talk) 07:14, 25 April 2024 (UTC) reply

Could you provide the thread for The Mary Sue? Conyo14 ( talk) 17:48, 25 April 2024 (UTC) reply

The discussions should be linked on the perennial sources page in The Mary Sue's entry - Cukie Gherkin ( talk) 19:40, 25 April 2024 (UTC) reply

Found it [16]. I will update the source analysis. Conyo14 ( talk) 20:10, 25 April 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Any thoughts on the keep !votes?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Toadette^Edit! 05:19, 27 April 2024 (UTC) reply

Keep per sources listed above by Cukie Gherkin. X ( talk) 05:14, 28 April 2024 (UTC) reply

Fictional element Proposed deletions

no articles proposed for deletion at this time