Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of terms in Shakugan no Shana

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 Delete. I suppose I could have relisted this one more time, but looking at the comments since I first relisted it, I can see that there are some very strong arguments to delete. I feel that if I were to relist this, it would simply garner more delete !votes and meanwhile we would have wasted more time of AfD !voters' time. It's somewhat telling that we didn't get more people interested in !voting here, If you feel I made this closure in error, please let me know and I'll relist it for the second time, but only if you truly believe that AfD regulars honestly feel this article needs to be kept. I don't want to waste the AfD regular's time to once again look through this AfD that they have likely looked at for at least two times before. Deathphoenix ʕ 03:50, 13 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

List of terms in Shakugan no Shana[edit]

Wikipedia is not dictionary, and copyvio from [1].--Zospped 09:57, 22 September 2006 (UTC)— Possible single purpose account: Zospped (talk • contribs) has made few or no other contributions outside this topic.[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Anime and manga-related deletions. -- Zospped 09:58, 22 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Japan-related deletions. -- Zospped 09:58, 22 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Note if it is a copyvio, please see here on how to deal with it and withdraw the AFD when done. I can't vouch for it, because my Japanese is too rusty. MER-C 10:12, 22 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. I can't immediately see why the nominator felt this was a copyvio, but it's certainly a pretty indiscriminate collection of trivia, devoid of context and incomprehensible to anyone such as myself who is not intimately familiar with the fictional world in question. — Haeleth Talk 12:02, 22 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep This is a glossary of fictional terms and glossaries are permitted on Wikipedia to a certain extent, especially when the terms have no place in Wikitory. (see List of glossaries and Category:Glossaries) The copyright infringement should be looked in to further, but the current link doesn't appear to back up the charges. --TheFarix (Talk) 12:13, 22 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comment This is the editor's first series of edits, and not only did they list it correctly, but they also added them to the Japan and Anime and manga deletion lists, which is something the normal new editor wouldn't know to do. This smells of sockpuppetry... --Roninbk _{t c #} 09:32, 30 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

AFD relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
Please add new discussions below this notice. Thanks, Deathphoenix ʕ 21:06, 4 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Rejoinder to Roninbk's comment above: Sockpuppetry of whom? Pre-sockpuppetry of somebody (such as myself) who will then agree? Possibly (well, I'll claim I'm somebody separate, but I would claim that, wouldn't I?), but I think you need rather more convincing evidence. There could be some other explanation. Anyway, I see no reason why the nomination shouldn't be considered on its merits. -- Hoary 08:31, 9 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Well Hoary, (if that IS your real name...,) first off I classified it as a neutral comment, not intending as a vote one way or the other. Secondly, I'll admit that it might not be a sock, but it is some form of single purpose account. The alledged SPA went two steps beyond the normal procedure listed at WP:AFD. Normally people outside the wikiproject don't add those tags. And third, even 2+ weeks since the nomination, the account doesn't have any other edits. Classic SPA. --Roninbk _{t c e #} 17:02, 9 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, because if WP is WP:NOT a repository for plot summaries, it certainly isn't one for plot ingredients. Plus it's a bizarre sort of article: I gather that there's no English version of this thing, so those people who are interested in those Japanese terms that aren't obviously gairaigo must often (not always, cf "Haridan") guess at an English translation, and then look that up. If these translations are original, this is not "Original Research" but it seems a bit pointless; if they aren't, the translator should be credited but is not. There's only one "External links" (sic): to a blank page. This kind of thing is prime material for a separate Wikia wiki, surely. -- Hoary 08:31, 9 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per Haeleth and Hoary. Sandstein 16:28, 12 October 2006 (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.