Forum:TC:List of SuperShadow's fanon creations and claims

Forums > Trash compactor archive > TC:List of SuperShadow's fanon creations and claims

This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was delete. (notable information can be resurrected from versions of the SuperShadow article pre-merge, and properly cited.) —Silly Dan (talk) 04:13, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

List of SuperShadow's fanon creations and claims (talk - history - links - logs)

Nomination & Delete - There are over one hundred statements on thise page, and all of them are unsourced. Did SuperShadow say all of these things? It doesn't matter, since anyone could add anything and get away with it since nothing has a source. Also, the page names Mickey Suttle, when research shows that he is probably not the writer of the content on the SuperShadow site. --Jedravent 21:53, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

  • Comment: moved to reflect the name of the main article. References to SuperShadow's alleged real name also removed. —Silly Dan (talk) 12:27, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
  • Completely unnecessary. Delete. --Imperialles 13:23, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete. Per Imp. Green Tentacle (Talk) 14:05, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
  • Merge any notable, citable information to the main StuporShadow article; delete the rest. jSarek 09:54, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
    • Comment These are all antecdotes. None of them are notable. And it's not like the main article is in the best shape; most of that article's statements are unsourced, too. Also, most of the external links have gone dead. —Unsigned comment by Jedravent (talk • contribs)
  • Delete - JMAS 02:39, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
  • I'm going to say keep, because if someone comes here looking for this crap, perhaps they will find this and learn something instead of trying to add it because it isn't here. -- Ozzel 03:01, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
    • I was going to agree, until I realized we don't point his crap at that page; we point it all at List of fanon creations. jSarek 03:07, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
      • In that case, delete. —Silly Dan (talk) 03:17, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
        • Fair enough. Delete. -- Ozzel 03:20, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
          • There are actually dozens of redirects pointing to the "SuperShadow's claims" page, now that I look more closely. There's probably no need for them to: some of them are too trivial to be worth a redirect, and I don't see the point in singling out one person's fanon for special treatment. —Silly Dan (talk) 23:16, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete per jSarek. Atarumaster88 Jedi Order (Talk page) 14:47, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete or merge/copy the content with the Supershadow article. Unit 8311 14:54, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
  • Merge notable, source-able info, then delete, per jSarek. Graestan(This party's over) 16:23, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
  • This stuff was already in the SuperShadow article before. Merge it back and cite sources. -- Riffsyphon1024 08:26, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
    • But then someone would have to actually read that crap. 8) —Silly Dan (talk) 12:06, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
      • You must realize that the reason for keeping this crap is for redirects to point to so that no one makes articles with this crap in the title. :) -- Riffsyphon1024 12:47, 20 December 2007 (UTC)