Zeldapedia:Articles for deletion

As a wiki there will be some pages that are not up to standard. On this page, listed are articles up for deletion. All users are invited to participate in the discussions as to whether these articles should be deleted or not. The pages listed will be voted on to reach a consensus. Once a consensus has been reached or a length of time has passed, an administrator will review the discussion and decide what action should be taken.

How to list an article

 * 1) Put    on the page to be deleted and save.
 * 2) Come to this page and create a level 3 header ( ===Title of page=== ) discussing the deletion under the Pages listed for deletion header.

Speedy deletion
Found a blank page? A duplicate? A misspelling? A page filled with nonsense? Try instead using a speedy deletion. Simply type   on the page and the page will appear in Category:Speedy deletion candidates. An administrator will check the page and make a decision without the voting process.

= Pages listed for deletion =

Temple Symbols
Like I said for the "elements" page. -- God  Of   Thunder!!!  15:48, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

Support

 * 1) Move the info to each of the temples' pages and the sage medallions, then delete the page. Solar flute
 * 2) Not useful to anyone. -- Auron  Kaizer ( ...Kaizer! ) 01:45, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

Selene
This character exists ONLY in the LoZ comic book series issued by Valiant, so her existence is not technically canon. Also, the name isn't even spelled right; it should be Seline, not Selene. But since she's from a non-canonical source, I don't think she should have a page. LadyNorbert 18:44, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

Reject

 * 1) We do have non-canonical information here, but I do support changing the spelling. Dialask77 15:08, 22 January 2009 (UTC)
 * 2) What this guy said. Notable non-canonical character, but needs serious help. Unfortunately, I haven't the time to check the comics. -- Auron  Kaizer ( ...Kaizer! ) 03:20, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

Merman
Most of the "appearances" really have nothing at all to do with mermaids/mermen. The Fishmen aren't really mermen, Joanne isn't really a mermaid, and, according to the article (I've never played the Oracle games, so I wouldn't just know myself), it is only referenced very obscurely in Oracle of Ages through an item (it would be like making an article called Roc when it's really just referenced through Roc's Feather).  Xykeb   Yvolix   Zraliv  01:02, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

Support

 * 1) Yep, this would be a completely useless mess of an article. -- Auron  Kaizer ( ...Kaizer! ) 01:45, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
 * 2) I second that—  Triforce   14 ( ... ) 04:17, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
 * 3) Horrible, horrible article...Bek The Conqueror 17:49, 21 February 2009 (UTC)
 * 4) Its an article based entirely off speculation and assumptions...just like the Wikipedia version. -- Moblin  Slayer (Working on it...) 13:02, 15 April 2009 (UTC)
 * 5) I really don't see the point of this article I didn't even know it existed or was even a serious topic until I saw a notice asking for some help with it User:991807

Comments
there is a real mermaid in links awkening. not that, that makes a difference. Oni Dark Link 22:37, 16 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Seeing as the entire game was a dream, I don't think that really anything besides Link and the Wind Fish (and possibly Marin) from that game really qualify as "real", even within the context of Zelda.-- Bek  (talk)  01:14, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

Agreed. However, why have an article concerning an entire race when only one individual is ever seen belonging to that race (and for that matter, with no other confirmed individuals, seen or not)? Any information concerning that particular mermaid would just go on her page.  Xykeb   Yvolix   Zraliv  06:53, 17 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Wait...you're saying that it's non-canonical now? --Auron  Kaizer !  09:08, 17 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Um, no? I'm saying that it's not necessary to make an article about a race when only one individual of that race exists. I didn't say anything about the canonicity of anything.  Xykeb   Yvolix   Zraliv  19:58, 17 April 2009 (UTC)
 * No, I meant Bek's comment, about it being "just a dream" and as such not "real", even within the context of Zelda. --Auron  Kaizer !  20:07, 17 April 2009 (UTC)
 * I suppose it depends on how you look at it. From a real-world viewpoint, the mermaid is real; she is in a Zelda game and therefore she is canon. However, from an in-game viewpoint, she was just part of the Wind Fish's dream and therefore was never real.  Xykeb   Yvolix   Zraliv  05:16, 18 April 2009 (UTC)
 * I should have been more clear... I meant that we can't take the fact that there was a mermaid in Link's Awakening to have any significance to the actual world of Zelda (Hyrule, Holodrum et al), and as such any article on them would mostly be speculation, which is not really encyclopedic, and would contain no more actual information besides that contained in the Martha article and the things regarding the names of certain things in OoA, but it didn't really come out that way from my little comment.-- Bek  (talk)  12:20, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

Grass
We really don't need this...if we go by this standard, we'll also need an article for trees, flowers, dirt, and water...-- Moblin  Slayer  20:48, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

Support

 * 1) Yeah kinda blatantly obvious.—Triforce4.png Triforce   14 ( ... ) 02:54, 6 March 2009 (UTC)
 * 2) Wow.....just wow.  Xykeb   Yvolix   Zraliv  03:55, 6 March 2009 (UTC)
 * 3) what board sole created that page? Oni Dark Link 22:46, 6 March 2009 (UTC)
 * 4) Hmm, I was thinking it might be useful if put forward in another way, but changed my mind. I mean, it's pretty obvious. -- Auron  Kaizer ( ...Kaizer! ) 02:47, 11 March 2009 (UTC)
 * 5) Eh... tack my vote on as well if it gets the deletion process moving faster on this.-- Bek  (talk)  12:23, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

Block
Same as with "grass." At least in my opinion. -- Moblin  Slayer (Working on it...) 02:40, 22 March 2009 (UTC)

Reject

 * 1) Objection! This article is actually pretty useful, but not in its current form. Let's see what we can do about it before we axe it like yet another grilled cheese sandwich. -- Auron  Kaizer ( ...Kaizer! ) 16:32, 24 March 2009 (UTC)
 * 2) I agree with AK. If we get some people together, we might be able to actually do something with this stub of an article to actually make it useful. Lisa  URAQT

Boss battle
...What is there to say? --Auron  Kaizer !  01:23, 12 April 2009 (UTC)

Support

 * 1) Completely useless. Also, the person/people that wrote it obviously had only ever played Ocarina of Time, Majora's Mask, Wind Waker, and Twilight Princess.  Xykeb   Yvolix   Zraliv  02:04, 12 April 2009 (UTC)
 * 2) Yeahhhh...-- Bek  (talk)  02:11, 12 April 2009 (UTC)
 * 3) Nothing that isn't already stated in the boss articles... or couldn't be added if it isn't —Triforce4.png Triforce   14 ( ... ) 02:55, 12 April 2009 (UTC)
 * 4) I don't think there was even one thing that wasn't in the bosses' articles already...that, and the the total lack of bosses from the hand held games/anything before OoT makes this article worthy of death by deletion.-- Moblin  Slayer (Working on it...) 13:02, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

Ataru Cagiva
Err, is it really that notable? I mean, personnel articles are all well and good, but covering something like a manga artist? Eh? --Auron  Kaizer !  07:53, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

Support

 * 1) I see this as kinda pointless...at this rate, we may as well list every single person who has worked on a Zelda game/manga...oh, and to the above person, you may want to put your vote in the "reject" section; this section "supports" the deletion. -- Moblin  Slayer (Working on it...) 12:56, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

Reject

 * 1) I think if it is viable non-canonical information, then why delete it? If his work was published under the Zelda name then, this may just be me, he deserves to be mentioned.  Dialask77  Ice Wizard  Ice Sorceror.png 13:20, 14 April 2009 (UTC)


 * 1) I think it would be kind of interesting if the article was a good one. I personally own most of the mangas, and as it is undeniable that it is connected to Zelda... I vote for a revision and correction of the page, not a deletion. (Khanson)

Majora's Last Stand
Read it. If you can find any redeeming qualities or any argument as to why it should be kept, you're a better man than me. --Auron  Kaizer !  13:10, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

Support

 * 1) Complete and utter speculation; relatively useless. --EveryDayJoe45 (talk) 15:34, 18 May 2009 (UTC)
 * 2) Meh I don't really like these anyway. 17:37, 18 May 2009 (UTC)
 * 3) So much utterly groundless speculation being stated as facts.....I suppose we could just rewrite it, but at the moment I think we should just let it die. I guess it just proves how far Big Poe=Nice Guy and Flashpenny are willing to go to "prove" their theories, huh?  Xykeb   Yvolix   Zraliv  21:21, 18 May 2009 (UTC)