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 keep. No prejudice against reopening. (non-admin closure) –– FormalDude talk 06:12, 19 September 2021 (UTC) reply

Roy (Fire Emblem) (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

As much as I am a fan of Fire Emblem, there are some characters who simply aren't notable, and Roy is one of them. Since my warnings were ignored/removed several times about this being non-notable, I have no choice but to nominate for AfD.

Roy is notorious for being in Smash Bros. and... well, that's kind of about it. Since his game was never localized, very few in the Western gaming press have ever analyzed his character from the standpoint of his appearances in the actual game he was in. The parts of the reception about his Smash Bros. appearances are also trivial mentions and listicles, and the reception overall is heavily WP:REFBOMBed with little substantial coverage.

Is the stuff about his Smash Bros. appearances notable enough to mention in Fire Emblem: The Binding Blade or even Fire Emblem? Sure, but this does not merit a standalone article on Roy. ZXCVBNM ( TALK) 07:49, 1 September 2021 (UTC) reply

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. ZXCVBNM ( TALK) 07:49, 1 September 2021 (UTC) reply
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Science fiction and fantasy-related deletion discussions. ZXCVBNM ( TALK) 07:49, 1 September 2021 (UTC) reply
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Video games-related deletion discussions. ZXCVBNM ( TALK) 07:49, 1 September 2021 (UTC) reply
  • Keep. The nominator is essentially saying that they are a fan of the Fire Emblem series, so therefore, they are in the best position to be a gatekeeper and judge what topics in this area is or isn't notable, or whether it should get a standalone article on Wikipedia or not. I note that no definite argument was ever advanced based on an analysis of whether the sources meet WP:GNG or WP:SIGCOV, only passing allusions or handwaves to trivial mentions; while we can all debate on whether the content from the article's cited sources constitute WP:SIGCOV, many of the sources cited in the article make a credible claim of significance with regards to the character's real world impact. Why is it relevant that the game the character starred in was never localized, when his first appearance was in a Smash game, which makes a case that this character is perhaps more closely associated to the Smash franchise then any other Fire Emblem character? Since the nominator indicated that they started this AfD because their "warnings" about notability were ignored by multiple editors, I conclude that this is a purely subjective WP:IDONTLIKEIT nomination on what the nominator thinks should be notable, and is not a valid rationale for deletion under this site's deletion policy. I also note that this page has already been reviewed by a NPP editor, so if there truly is an objectively insurmountable issue with notability or significant coverage, I'd expect this article to be redirected or AfD'd at the first instance as part of the NPP reviewer's patrol activities. Haleth ( talk) 08:42, 1 September 2021 (UTC) reply
    The point of me mentioning that "I am a fan of Fire Emblem" is showing that I WANT this page to be kept, so there simply needs to be presented evidence that Roy is notable. So far that has not been shown in this AfD, only vague assertions that he's probably notable, but the sources just need to be found. ZXCVBNM ( TALK) 19:21, 1 September 2021 (UTC) reply
    That does not change the fact that your nomination rationale is not rooted in existing policy or guidelines, but a subjective opinion of what should be notable. AfD is for article for deletion, not article for dicussion. AfD is for when you genuinely believe that the issues with the extent of sourcing for the topic, not simply confined to what is found on the article, is insurmountable. Your claim that you want to keep this article, by nominating it for deletion, is frankly contradictory, and also deletion is not cleanup. Since you claimed that you actually want this article to exist or to fix it somehow, per WP:ATD it would be more appropriate had you simply voiced your concerns on a talk page about the removal of your notability tag by another editor. When multiple sources like Shacknews have articulated the historicity within the industry behind the character's introduction in Melee, clearly attributing it as the reason why the Fire Emblem series is released outside of Japan in the first place, when the publisher's original intent was to promote an exclusive domestic release of a game that is never localized as you have pointed out, I don't think these assertions are at all vague as you are saying. As Daranios have noted, quoting WP:WHYN, there is adequate material to write a short article here. Haleth ( talk) 23:49, 1 September 2021 (UTC) reply
    Please stop with the disruptive WP:Wikilawyering (specifically the part about "Asserting that the technical interpretation of the policies and guidelines should override the underlying principles they express"). I think it's fairly common sense to see that my argument is that the page is not notable, i.e. that it fails WP:GNG, even if I did not spell it out. My statement that "I want to keep the article" does not mean that I think this article should be kept even if it had no notability whatsoever. It was in direct response to your assertion that since I didn't like the character, I was nominating it for deletion (which is false.) ZXCVBNM ( TALK) 00:14, 2 September 2021 (UTC) reply
    I take umbrage to your allegation that I am being disruptive. My response is directly addressing your original rationale, which specifically did not articulate an argument based on WP:GNG or that you have done a WP:BEFORE, lack any proper source analysis but instead focuses on the lack of localization of the game the character starred in or the alleged sparseness of opinions from western critics, or how the claims of significance made by reliable sources are trivial mentions at best. I never said anything about you not liking the character, that is irrelevant, my quote of WP:IDONTLIKEIT refers to your subjective opinion that an article about the topic should not exist based on your personal experiences of the series. I note that you made a point to bring up the fact you are a fan on your own initiative, and using the same common sense principle you are asserting, that appears to be the only underlying principle expressed by your nomination rationale. I suggest that we agree to disagree, and let the community decide whether your original AfD rationale, or that your subsequent arguments should be accepted based on an appeal to our collective common sense, is justified. Haleth ( talk) 00:38, 2 September 2021 (UTC) reply
  • Keep, appears in multiple notable games and is the lead in Fire Emblem: The Binding Blade. Eulenbär ( talk) 10:27, 1 September 2021 (UTC) reply
    So what? WP:NOTINHERITED. It doesn't matter how many notable works something appears in, it has to stand up for itself - or otherwise be merged/redirected to such works. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 06:01, 6 September 2021 (UTC) reply
  • Keep There is a fair-sized, referenced reception section there, so this should satisfy WP:WHYN and therefore WP:GNG. What would be the benefit of deletion? Daranios ( talk) 10:43, 1 September 2021 (UTC) reply
    Whether "there is a fair sized reception section" is not what we are arguing here, it is a question of the quality of the sources which are almost unilaterally trivial in nature. One cannot simply dredge up literally any mention of a character and call it significant coverage. ZXCVBNM ( TALK) 19:17, 1 September 2021 (UTC) reply
    @ Zxcvbnm: I agree that significance cannot be built from trivial blocks. But it can be built from non-trivial information, the length of the individual sources is a secondary concern. And I'd say if a character is well or badly received and why is not trivial information because, well, that's the heart of a Reception section. And as another example, if a character is a cause for a game to be released internationally instead of only nationally, seems rather important to me, too. Daranios ( talk) 07:30, 2 September 2021 (UTC) reply
  • Comment - Some of these sources are just terrible. There's an entire half-paragraph about "sword fighter character archetypes" where the subject isn't even mentioned in two of the three sources and the last one simply lumps the character in with several others. It seems like half the rest of the reception sources are just trivial mentions from character ranking lists. This one in particular is one I would describe as absolute trash, "The only Roy we want to see in Smash is Roy Koopa Jr., the Koopaling. Who is this sad fraud supposed to be? He’s not even a turtle!" Taking a fluff joke and trying to rewrite it as a critique shows the lack of substance in this article. TTN ( talk) 11:07, 1 September 2021 (UTC) reply
  • Keep - We know that there's another source that are "trash", but Roy has been cited by the multiple sources. It would definitely pass notability guidelines. 103.100.101.42 ( talk) 12:46, 1 September 2021 (UTC) reply
  • Keep. Certainly a noteworthy character. His inclusion as a fighter in the Smash Bros. series alone already makes him one of the more well-known videogame characters by default. It may well be the case that the sources on the page could be improved, but there's absolutely no way deletion would be suitable here. The Œstrogen8r ...𝖙𝖊𝖑𝖑 𝖒𝖊 13:38, 1 September 2021 (UTC) reply
    Please, then, give your WP:THREE best sources that prove without a doubt that Roy is notable. Otherwise, that is just an assertion with no evidence behind it. ZXCVBNM ( TALK) 19:19, 1 September 2021 (UTC) reply
    I apologise that I can't spare enough time to do this, but frankly the character of Roy would seem so obviously noteworthy to me that if WP:THREE were somehow not satisfied in this case, I'd be more inclined to understand this as a failure of WP:THREE than of Roy. The Œstrogen8r ...𝖙𝖊𝖑𝖑 𝖒𝖊 16:59, 15 September 2021 (UTC) reply
  • Keep The Shacknews and Destructoid pieces are good enough for me, so that's two satisfactory sources. I'd also like to point out that WP:THREE is an essay, not policy; all policy requires is "sources," which I believe is satisfied here. Mlb96 ( talk) 05:36, 2 September 2021 (UTC) reply
    WP:THREE is an essay, but the principle behind it is a policy. While the Shacknews article is probably the one best source, the Destructoid article is a simple listing of his combat moves in a game he isn't the main character of. So if that's really the 2nd best source, it obviously doesn't pass WP:GNG. ZXCVBNM ( TALK) 07:29, 2 September 2021 (UTC) reply
    I don't see how the use of this source is any different then this writeup, also by a Destructoid writer, which currently occupies an entire paragraph in the reception section for Corrin. If we examine both writeups together, I suppose the key point to take away are the author's personal opinions about the characters, not the walls of gamecruft text that dominates the articles' prose? Also, Mlb96, Daranios, I have since added a couple more sources to the article and cleaned up the prose further. Let me know what you think. Haleth ( talk) 08:09, 2 September 2021 (UTC) reply
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Japan-related deletion discussions. Jumpytoo Talk 18:05, 4 September 2021 (UTC) reply
  • Merge and redirect to List of Fire Emblem characters or a relevant section. The reception series begins with "Roy's appearance in Melee, alongside Marth's, introduced the Fire Emblem series to players outside of Japan. It was in part because of his inclusion that Nintendo began localizing and releasing Fire Emblem games internationally, beginning with the seventh title in the series". This got me curious re the sources. [1] just mentions him in passing twice, once saying he is the main character, once mentioning his father's character. [2] mentions him seven times, but the coverage is not significant, it just confirms such a character exists and was 'new' at some point in the franchise history. [3] is even worse, which leaves [4]. That one is fine, but is Official Nintendo Magazine independent here? Most other refs are either not independent or contain passing mentions. [5] is in-depth - if we can call three or so paragraphs in-depth - but it concerns only his appearance in one game. In the end I am seeing no reliable in-depth coverage, this is just a humanoid Pokemon like a dozen we merged and redirected in the last few weeks. -- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 05:59, 6 September 2021 (UTC) reply
    No dedicated article covering a List of Fire Emblem characters exist on Wikipedia. There is no suitable merge or redirect target since the identified sources clearly establish that the character is independently notable, though the aggregate coverage from English sources is a tad short on character analysis. That is still not an issue as the article's present content is lengthier then what we would typically consider to be stub-length. Haleth ( talk) 08:42, 6 September 2021 (UTC) reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwaiiplayer ( talk) 12:44, 9 September 2021 (UTC) reply

On the topic of no list or valid merge target, I believe that Fire Emblem characters as a whole aren't really notable enough to warrant creating a List of Fire Emblem characters page. Thus, I feel like merging isn't really a good option when the theoretical list wouldn't have enough coverage. Unnamed anon ( talk) 20:45, 17 September 2021 (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.