Forum:TC:Unidentified Onderonian male citizen 2

Forums > Trash compactor archive > TC:Unidentified Onderonian male citizen 2

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 or, if the page was deleted, in the Senate Hall rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record. The result of the debate was no consensus. —MJ— Training Room 21:27, November 13, 2012 (UTC)

Unidentified Onderonian male citizen 2 (talk - history - links - logs)

Completely non-notable, poorly written, etc. Even if I take the effort to clean up its bad writing, it'll still be non-notable (IMO) and worthy of nothing more than a delete.

Delete

  1. — DigiFluid(Whine here) 13:37, October 25, 2012 (UTC)
  2. How many more generic, non notable Humans say "Free Onderon!1" in these articles? JangFett (Talk) 13:42, October 25, 2012 (UTC)
  3. Per Jang. It was most likely something like this. Lazy designers. Decide to use same model for a couple of individuals. Result: Hundreds of twins. Nothing else to add, besides noting that it also lacks many parameters of wookififaction. Winterz (talk) 22:54, October 29, 2012 (UTC)

Keep

  • Has an unique character model (as far as I can tell).92.84.81.72 13:59, October 25, 2012 (UTC) (Vote struck per policy: less than 50 mainspace edits. — DigiFluid)
  1. He had a line. He appeared in two episodes. As far as Unidentified articles go, there are plenty of less notable ones. Menkooroo (talk) 01:44, October 26, 2012 (UTC)
  2. Stepping away from the quality of writing and formatting (which should hardly ever be a deciding factor for deletion here—there's always room for improvement, and plus we're not SW Fanon, where article quality is a significant factor), I find that in this case, the presentation of dialogue gives notability. Conversely, there were multiple reuses of the character model, so that may not be enough to assume an appearance in "The Soft War" beyond the reused model, as was a problem with Mak Plain. That still doesn't negate the speaking character's notability, however. CC7567 (talk) 18:38, October 31, 2012 (UTC)

Discussion