Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Table of Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles character appearances

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 keep. Had positive improvement. is verifiable & serves navigation purpose. (nomination statement is unclear) PeaceNT (talk) 19:44, 9 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Table of Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles character appearances

This article is totally unnecessary, as all the notable characters have their own articles which state when they had their appearances. As such, this is I guess "Chartcruft", like list cruft. Judgesurreal777 (talk) 03:46, 1 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

True. I agree. Delete —B o L 03:47, 1 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Per Nom Thedjatclubrock :) ^(T/C) 03:58, 1 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, someone has obviously put a fair bit of work into this, so it's a shame to delete it, but it is more or less unnecessary with the information being in all of the relevant articles. Lankiveil (talk) 04:37, 1 January 2008 (UTC).[reply]
Delete : information should be in each individual character's articles. Phantomwiki (talk) 06:16, 1 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete If this article was kept, it would set a very bad precedent. It should be snowballed. Aipzith (talk) 06:59, 1 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep The nominator doesn't seem to understand the table, which doesn't show first appearances. The rest of the nomination is just WP:IDONTLIKEIT per WP:CRUFT2. Colonel Warden (talk) 09:10, 1 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. This is information I personally have absolutely no interest in whatsoever but can see its use for others who certainly do. It would be helpful if the article at least briefly introduced the Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles and explained some of the trends of character development so folks like myself could grasp what the table is about and then move on with our lives. Article seems like it could easily develop into something a bit more substantial so no reason to delete. Benjiboi 11:48, 1 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. I've tried to add some intro context and links to the main articles. I'm guessing this is a branch off the list of characters article which itself was a branch from the main article. Seems cruel to punish the editors for rightly trying to limit the size of the main article by deleting anything tat isn't kept there. Perhaps they should have organized it better. Benjiboi 12:05, 1 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Appearances are a defining characteristic for each character. List of Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles characters would be the ideal place, and the fact that this table could theoretically be merged there warrants its inclusion. Now, you could say that the info is already there, but it's obvious that a table presents it much more nicely, in a similar way that we have infoboxes to spell out what is already in prose. –Pomte 12:34, 1 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep this impressive piece of verifible work concerning one of recent memories most popular franchises. Happy New Year! Sincerely, --Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles^Tally-ho! 19:05, 1 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - Just because TMNT is notable, does not mean that this table is notable, as notability is determined by reliable sourcing, which this article has none of. Judgesurreal777 (talk) 19:22, 1 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Then please add some sources. Best, --Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles^Tally-ho! 19:31, 1 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Notability is not an issue in this case. -- Ned Scott 06:05, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Actually, this article is obviously created as a section of the TMNT main article for space reasons, so the whole "notability is not inherited" mantra should not apply here. ( If we had a photograph as part of the TMNT article, would we be deleting it because it resides in a separate file from the text? ) This table seems to be the most efficient way to organize the information, and primary sources should be adequate for this kind of material as we've already dealt with notability. WP:IDONTLIKEIT is not a reason to delete the article. Squidfryerchef (talk) 21:22, 1 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Perfect for TMNTPedia, but for us, trivia. --Dhartung | Talk 23:13, 1 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. While very different from a normal list, this is a legitimate navigation tool. No one has cited a guideline or policy that backs up the deletion of the article, and the only reason given is that it might be unnecessary. I do not believe that warrants deletion. -- Ned Scott 06:03, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Provided the facts presented is readily apparent in the sources. Taemyr (talk) 14:10, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Is a suitable navigation tool. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 06:15, 3 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Tables that concern subjects whose notability is established elsewhere seem acceptable. If the table contained many red links I'd have a concern but most of the links are blue. EdJohnston (talk) 12:50, 3 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep WP:CRUFTCRUFT nomination. SashaNein (talk) 14:09, 9 January 2008 (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.