Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hot Spot (Transformers)

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.

The result was redirect to Protectobots. Delete and redirecting Spartaz ^Humbug! 07:48, 31 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hot Spot (Transformers)

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

Minor fictional character that does not appear to have significant third-party sources to assert notability. See, for example, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Black Shadow (Transformers).

Redirect - To Protectobots; character is not notable enough to warrant his own article--GroovySandwich 05:47, 16 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

delete no third-party sources for this minor fictional character. Also, can an admit please, please group all these mass noms into one? The rationale and most people's response is one or none, if there are a few with outstanding features then list those but we can safely group most. HominidMachinae (talk) 06:17, 16 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Apart from what I said on the Gaihawk AfD, another problem is if people are going for Merge or Redirect, the articles have different targets. Black Kite (t) (c) 12:07, 16 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment - The above opinion of HominidMachinae should be struck down, there are two third-party sources cited in the article. Mathewignash (talk) 13:48, 16 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Correction, in my opinion the sources are not independent, significant coverage. For how very minor characters can appear to have sources when in fact none are reliable see my essay WP:NSB HominidMachinae (talk) 18:27, 16 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Merge or redirect to Protectobots. JIP | Talk 11:07, 16 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Keep or Merge to Protectobots per WP:BEFORE #5, the member of a team of super heroes should probably be merged to their team page rather than deleting them. Mathewignash (talk) 12:33, 16 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. — • Gene93k (talk) 18:27, 17 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:14, 23 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete fails WP:RS. Stuartyeates (talk) 05:28, 23 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete fails WP:RS and WP:NOTE. Dwanyewest (talk) 19:18, 27 July 2011 (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.