Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Namek (A fictional exoplanet of Dragon Ball)

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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:17, 30 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Namek (A fictional exoplanet of Dragon Ball)

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

I don't think this page fits any of the WP:CSD criteria but clearly does not meet WP:GNG. Purely a short description of a non notable fictional planet. CoconutOctopus talk 15:25, 23 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Fictional elements and Anime and manga. Deltaspace⁴² (talk • contribs) 15:29, 23 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I think we should keep that article, it's just a fictional exoplanet like the characters, and there a petition to change the name Kleper 22B to Namek — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tcygnus (talk • contribs) 15:52, 23 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not remove the AFD message from the article regardless of your opinion on the nomination, thank you. CoconutOctopus talk 16:03, 23 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: This is an article that lacks citations and has an improbable title. ―Susmuffin ^Talk 16:47, 23 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Wikipedia is not FANDOM. Fictional articles must not be WP:INDISCRIMINATE information. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 18:29, 23 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete I can not think of any good redirect targets but even then there is nothing to WP:PRESERVE and even then the title is to specific to be a viable search term. Questions? four Olifanofmrtennant (she/her) 19:44, 23 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Per WP:GNG. Memer15151 Chat 20:41, 23 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete No sources and no signs of notability. QuicoleJR (talk) 01:56, 24 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: poorly cited, almost entirely in-universe perspective, and no sign of meeting the GNG. – dudhhr^talk_contribs^she_her 21:58, 24 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – Clearly fails WP:GNG, and suggesting the import of the content to a fan wiki or site. Toadette ^{(Merry Christmas, and a happy new year)} 07:00, 25 December 2023 (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.