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. ( non-admin closure) – Davey2010 ^Talk 00:46, 5 November 2016 (UTC) reply

List of Sword Art Online characters (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)

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

This list of characters is unnecessary, and little more than an opportunity to drop all kinds of OR and plot detail into Wikipedia. References prove easily that these characters have no shred of notability and have generated no interest besides a mention here and there on ANN. List of characters articles easily turn into cruft--if some characters are important (by definition not all characters can be equally important), they can be listed in the main article, just like we do in articles outside of anime/manga. Drmies ( talk) 21:55, 28 October 2016 (UTC) reply

See also Talk:Sword_Art_Online#Proposed_merge_with_List_of_Sword_Art_Online_characters AngusWOOF ( bark • sniff) 22:58, 1 November 2016 (UTC) reply

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Anime and manga-related deletion discussions. AngusWOOF ( bark • sniff) 21:58, 28 October 2016 (UTC) reply

• Keep I was just watching an episode of the show and came here. I see additional information outside of just plot information listed for some of the characters. All major fictional franchises have character list articles, which although sometimes challenged, are always kept. Every single one I'm aware of anyway. I don't see how this one is any different than them. Dream Focus 04:41, 29 October 2016 (UTC) reply
• Merge in a style similar to The Irregular at Magic High School. It would take an expert of the series to condense the list neatly though. DragonZero ( Talk · Contribs) 05:18, 29 October 2016 (UTC) reply
• Keep There are just too many works for this series to have the characters presented neatly on the main article. I commend the work done at The Irregular at Magic High School but you are talking about 4 different works, versus 22 for sword art online. My suggestion is to try to improve the characters article via magazine reviews, reviews, ect... If any of the 22 different works attain WP:GA status then linking the character names would be helpful. - Knowledgekid87 ( talk) 15:10, 29 October 2016 (UTC) reply

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. Gabe Iglesia ( talk) 22:42, 29 October 2016 (UTC) reply

• Strong keep, this was just discussed six months ago with the consensus not to merge. Considering the fact that Sword Art Online is one of the most popular Japanese media series of all time, and that the article's 15 sources are already more than can be found on many a BLP, I find the claim "these characters have no shred of notability" to be difficult to believe. Wikipedia has always hosted lists of characters, such as List of Neighbours characters (2016) (TV series), List of Sonic the Hedgehog characters (video game), and List of Marvel Comics characters: V (comics), so the second part of the nomination isn't really true. Also, you have to keep in mind that since this is a Japanese series for a primarily Japanese audience, the majority of coverage is probably not in English. A search for just one of the characters brings up plenty of hits, which can then be sifted through and sorted. Satellizer el Bridget  ^(Talk) 10:33, 30 October 2016 (UTC) reply

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. Satellizer el Bridget  ^(Talk) 11:08, 30 October 2016 (UTC) reply

• Redirect or selective merge. Contrary to the above, there has been a recent trend of many of these list articles being removed. They are not necessary to understand the information in the main articles, and they're often just totally cluttered and filled with irrelevant junk. If this cannot establish independent notability, it can easily be cut down to the most core characters. TTN ( talk) 22:14, 30 October 2016 (UTC) reply

• Again you are talking about 22 different plot lines. - Knowledgekid87 ( talk) 00:34, 31 October 2016 (UTC) reply

• And there is nothing in that list that is necessary to understand those plot lines. People will tout the necessity of character lists, but please show me what exactly is so necessary that it cannot be briefly mentioned in a concise section of the main article or simply contextually within plot summaries. Core characters get mentioned in the core summary and minor characters, if relevant, get mentioned in the relevant context. If you have a featured episode list, it doesn't particularly help to have a link to "Secondary Character G" explaining three irrelevant facts. TTN ( talk) 00:48, 31 October 2016 (UTC) reply

• There is simply too much information to jam into the main article, even if you do have the main character how do you explain their role in the 22 plots without confusing the reader? - Knowledgekid87 ( talk) 00:55, 31 October 2016 (UTC) reply

• If it's a main character without an article, link them with a redirect to the primary character section of their first work, or if the sub-works each have their own article, simply describe the character in that work's character section while linking back to that primary work. Nothing of value is lost other than a central place to link those redirects, but as I mentioned above, nobody is really going to care about a couple dozen irrelevant secondary and minor characters. What is the necessity? What can be done with the character list that cannot be done with what I have said? There is no difference between a separate article and a primary section in the main article other than the number of irrelevant minor characters found in character lists. TTN ( talk) 01:04, 31 October 2016 (UTC) reply

• Keep While TTN may gloat about destruction of encyclopedic content, the fact is that characters from a notable fictional franchise (multiple separate fictional works) without a single redirect target are both appropriate and routinely kept. The aberrancies he cites are from poorly-attended, poorly-argued AfDs. Jclemens ( talk) 02:36, 31 October 2016 (UTC) reply
• Keep There's a lot of precedence toward lists of characters formajor fiction franchises (this one has novels, comics, games, 2 TV series, and a theatrical movie, so far). Not only are these lists useful to readers, they help with containment of what might otherwise become clusters of poor stub articles on minor characters. This list, for what it's worth, is actually better than many as it's neither unreferenced nor excessively detailed. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 21:43, 31 October 2016 (UTC) reply
• Keep - A precedence has been set by previous anime's and I don't see a good enough reason to change what is essentially working. meets WP:LISTN. The anime is popular, maybe not as popular as some of the others have noted, but among the thousands of animes released, it is one of the more notable ones. This alone should be enough to warrant a keep. N. GASIETA| talk 00:46, 2 November 2016 (UTC) reply
• Keep - This is a very popular anime and video game series currently. If absolutely necessary, I can dig for sources, but I just cannot believe that we could scrounge up enough sources to meet the WP:GNG between all the games and anime releases, especially with a number of the character having their own individual articles, which I've reviewed in the past, and thought they looked pretty good... Sergecross73 msg me 18:58, 3 November 2016 (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.