Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pokémon TCG: Diamond & Pearl and Platinum and POP sets
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- 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. per WP:SNOW JForget 00:26, 7 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
AfDs for this article:
- Pokémon TCG: Diamond & Pearl and Platinum and POP sets (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Blatant fancruft; it's of no use to the average reader. -sesuPRIME 00:18, 2 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. Didn't see any citations, and it's basically a huge list that would be of no interest or relevance to anyone who doesn't play the TCG. There's absolutely no context in any of this. MelicansMatkin (talk, contributions) 01:07, 2 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. To be honest, I thought it looked quite boring, no citations, and irrelevant. Mokoniki | talk 01:33, 2 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. I dont know why this stayed. Someone said something months ago about it, but it got ignored. Blake (Talk·Edits) 02:03, 2 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. WP:IINFO. I think we can all agree it falls under here. AP1787 (talk) 04:34, 2 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. This wouldn't even pass notability on Bulbapedia, let alone here. TheChrisD Rants•Edits 17:41, 2 September 2009 (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.