Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Zordon

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.^King Jakob _C2 21:57, 7 March 2013 (UTC)(Non-admin closure)[reply]

Zordon

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

The notability for this article is being disputed: Article is about a fictional TV character. 24.184.76.2 (talk) 19:20, 28 February 2013 (UTC) [reply]

Socks and or SPAs. -- DQ (ʞlɐʇ) 01:30, 4 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep. Well written article, but references may need to be looked at. — Preceding unsigned comment added by GAA-22EE (talk • contribs)
Delete per nom. 24.184.76.2 (talk) 20:39, 28 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
This comment was left by the nominator but was not properly signed.—Ryulong (琉竜) 10:30, 3 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Mighty Morphin Power Rangers, subject is not notable enough to have his own article. Yuffo (talk) 20:37, 2 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2013 February 28. Snotbot t • c » 20:42, 28 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 23:42, 28 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 23:42, 28 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Weak delete The article is well written, but has no references. I also checked Wikia before casting my vote to make sure that there was at least some info on Zordon on the internet, and they have a well rounded article. Now to figure out why this was on my watchlist in the first place...--Gee totes (talk) 00:26, 3 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. It is a well written article but requires references. Evilgidgit (talk) 01:55, 3 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Notable fictional character, appeared on television for five years and in two feature films, just needs references.—Ryulong (琉竜) 10:11, 3 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Notes, the mentions of the importance of the character in this published book and this German paper support the notability of the character. It is also important to note that sockpuppetry may be marring this discussion per Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Siabaf.—Ryulong (琉竜) 10:21, 3 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Socks and or SPAs. -- DQ (ʞlɐʇ) 01:30, 4 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect per above. 174.44.109.140 (talk) 01:30, 3 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to MMPR per above. 17:11, 3 March 2013 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.237.92.182 (talk)
Redirect to MMPR. Fails WP:GNG 69.174.58.36 (talk) 19:16, 3 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect per above. Pican33 (talk) 20:08, 3 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Ryulong. 109.153.185.198 (talk) 20:23, 3 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect per Pican33. power ranger characters usually don't get their own articles. HaleAgnes (talk) 20:53, 3 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Redirectper above 21:19, 3 March 2013 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1001:B018:C8FA:A9D7:6D59:1865:826F (talk)

Note to the closing administrator: This debate has most definitely been disrupted by a series of IPs and accounts all operated by the same person. There are only 3 registered users who have editted this page that have accounts older than February 2013 and that is myself, Gee totes, and Evilgidgit.—Ryulong (琉竜) 01:20, 4 March 2013 (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.