Brickipedia:Articles for Deletion

From Brickipedia, the LEGO Wiki
Revision as of 08:21, 18 March 2010 by NovaFlare (talk | contribs) (→‎Willie (Evening Dress): rm speedydelete (became a redirect))
Forums: Index →
Administrators' noticeboard
→ Articles for Deletion

This forum is where nominations for pages in need of deletion can be placed. To leave a nomination, please add a new section with with the name of the article in question as the title. Also, please leave {{delete}} on the nominated page.

Before proposing an article for deletion, consider marking it with a maintenance tag instead or propose an article merger.

Note: "Vandal pages" should be marked with {{Speedydelete}} and do not need to be discussed here.

Ark of the Covenant

Delete

  1. Though it's important to the storyline, it's just another feature for the set. I don't think it really deserves its own page. --Alphateam7911 21:27, January 2, 2010 (UTC)
  2. I dont see the point of having all these extra pages about parts of the sets. This should go on the page of whatever set it is included inUser:Mackmoron11/sig
  3. Per Mackmoron11 NovaHawk 22:57, January 15, 2010 (UTC)
  4. Per Mackmoron11. Construction Worker Do you need help? 22:09, January 23, 2010 (UTC)
  5. Per above. Ajraddatz Talk 16:45, February 21, 2010 (UTC)
  6. I say delete unless you are going to make pages like the holy grail and stuff--User:Joeman200/sig 05:24, February 25, 2010 (UTC)

Keep

  1. That is part of a set and a major part of the story. Why delete it? User:CloneComanderCody/sig 11:39 January 3, 2010 (UTC)
  2. --User:Coupon11/sig 16:44, January 9, 2010 (UTC)
  3. per CloneComanderCody. -Nerfblasterpro: It's Nerf, or Nothing!Maverick.jpg 22:55, January 12, 2010 (UTC)
  4. per CloneCommanderCody as well.--User:Legoguy1866/siggy 13:14, January 17, 2010 (UTC)
  5. Per BF2.--Agent Chase: Agents-Logo.png:Agents in Action! 02:37, February 20, 2010 (UTC)
  6. It's an article-its the main part of Indiana Jones 1-It is gold-and it is better than nothing.User:BobaFett2/sig2
  7. I like the article--Brickboymaker 15:35, February 25, 2010 (UTC)
Saying that you like the article really isn't a good enough reason. I think this vote should be removed. Construction Worker Do you need help? 11:32, March 3, 2010 (UTC)

Comments

* At any rate, this page needs an "Appearances" section if it's even going to be considered for keeping. NovaHawk 22:46, January 3, 2010 (UTC)

Diagon Alley

As of now we know diagon alley is in a set and probably the game. But the article explains nothings, misses out an appearance and uses a minifigure template. If Diagon is a hub or something in the game, then ok, but at the moment i dont see it as article worthy. (unless we bring back all the bionicle locations >_>) Kingcjc 22:22, February 25, 2010 (UTC)

Delete

  1. Kingcjc 22:22, February 25, 2010 (UTC)
  2. There have been three Diagon Alley-based sets, but I don't see a need to have an article on the Alley itself NovaHawk 00:27, February 26, 2010 (UTC)
  3. Per cjc and Nighthawk. Construction Worker Do you need help? 20:37, March 2, 2010 (UTC)

Keep

  1. Diagon Alley is a vital part of not only Harry Potter, but LEGO Harry Potter: Years 1-4 as well. I have also expanded the article, and I think we should keep it due to it not only being the LEGO Harry Potter: Years 1-4 hub, but also a vital part of the story line. Quickbuild2345 20:39, March 2, 2010 (UTC)
    Source for it being the hub? NovaHawk 00:25, March 3, 2010 (UTC)
  2. 's not that bad...User:BobaFett2/sig2
  3. its a big part of harry potter --Brickboymaker 19:23, March 11, 2010 (UTC)
  4. This article needs to be definetly Kept.-- WHAT?!?! User:Eddlikeshotsauce KABOOM 23:19, March 17, 2010 (UTC)

Comments

  • You may have expanded it, but it doesn't seem like a vital part in the storyline. The only place it should be mentioned is the articles for the sets that have it in them. Construction Worker Do you need help? 00:14, March 3, 2010 (UTC)

List of Clone brands

Delete

  1. Do we really need to be listed other LEGO-like products? NovaHawk 03:05, March 2, 2010 (UTC)
  2. Here's a hint: This is a LEGO wiki. =P Construction Worker Do you need help? 20:39, March 2, 2010 (UTC)
  3. The name also leads people to believe it is Clone Trooper brands, ie Gunner, Pilot, Commander... Delete. User:CaptainJag/sig1 03:17, March 4, 2010 (UTC)
  4. This page disconcerns LEGO and deserves to be deleted.--User:Darthch/sig 12:04, March 11, 2010 (UTC)

Keep

Comments

Www.fbtb.net

Delete

  1. Do we need this? If so, then it really needs work. User:Ajraddatz/sig 05:40, March 7, 2010 (UTC)
  2. I think there was a decision a while ago to remove all fansites (but no real resolution on whether to allow pages on major LEGO Wikia-based fansites) but I'm not completely sure on it. I remember talking to someone about it years ago, and pages like Brickset, Lugnet, Peeron were all removed (and I thought FBTB :S), but Legopedia stayed. Anyway, I vote delete for this for both being a fansite and poor quality. NovaHawk 10:02, March 7, 2010 (UTC)

Comments

  • I believe a decision of whether they should have Fan Site pages on Brickipedia should be decided elsewhere. I think Brickipedia should have, since it would bring Brickipedia closer to being the center of LEGO on the internet. Some may believe it's dispromoting Brickipedia in general, but it isn't, it's only enhancing. That doesn't change the fact that this article needs to be worked on, but I think we should have detailed pages for each Fansite. Feel free to disagree.--User:Darthch/sig 12:09, March 11, 2010 (UTC)
  • BobaFett2 is in complete agreement with Darthch.User:BobaFett2/sig2


All LEGO Harry Potter: Years 1-4 minifigures which have only appeared in this game to date

Delete

  1. We don't even know that these characters will even make it to the final cut of the game, and if they do, they may only appear for a brief second in a cutscene so why make articles about them? NovaHawk 23:37, March 8, 2010 (UTC)
    • I would count images/trailers/confirmed in previews as existing Kingcjc 17:05, March 11, 2010 (UTC)
  1. Only keep ones with pictures to have proof. GG 360Gamegear.jpg 19:43, March 12, 2010 (UTC) P.S. Delete Moaning Myrtle. I have a problem with perverted ghosts.

Keep

  1. Ok, I think you should keep Moaning Myrtle, Crookshanks and any others that have appeared in screenshots or in trailers. As for the others, delete until the game is released, and if they appear, create a new article for them. Mageamooney.
  2. IF they've all appeared, keep them all. If they're not in the final game, then delete them then. What's the point of the future release templates if we're not even going to use them.--User:Darthch/sig 13:13, March 13, 2010 (UTC)
  3. Per Darthch. User:Mariofighter3/sig3 23:48, March 15, 2010 (UTC)
  4. I don't want to get rid of any pages unless we really need to. They look fine to me. Ajraddatz Talk 23:20, March 17, 2010 (UTC)

Comments

  • To clarify, all articles listed above have appeared in trailers, pictures etc for the game. However, it isn't known if they'll be playable or appear in a cutscene for a frame, or if they'll even make it to the final cut of the game. NovaHawk 23:58, March 12, 2010 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.brickimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Brickipedia:Articles_for_Deletion&oldid=690019"