Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nexus Prime

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 redirect to Original thirteen Transformers. T. Canens (talk) 23:22, 18 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Nexus Prime

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

A poor article which is supported by "sources" of questionable reliability and long discredited fansites. Dwanyewest (talk) 20:23, 2 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 02:12, 3 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Keep or merge to Prime (Transformers). Mathewignash (talk) 02:37, 3 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

What? This is a fan club character. The most he should get is a redirect. NotARealWord (talk) 16:50, 3 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It's a Hasbro character now, they took him over from the club because they wanted to use him. Mathewignash (talk) 18:32, 3 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Well, they haven't actually gotten around to using him yet. I stand by my vote. We don't keep articles because we think the subject miht become notable in the future. Even if they have used him, it might take awhile or him to become notable, unless he was prominently featured in the live-action film series. (Considering how bayformers is the portion of Transformers that receives the most exposure) NotARealWord (talk) 18:45, 3 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - I added some sources. Mathewignash (talk) 13:02, 6 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, here we go again. Ahem:

That Erin Brereton book was written long before Nexus was named, so, no "extensive coverage".
TFU.info has lo been rejected as a reliable source (all the site does is copy from the profile cards, so it probably counts as WP:LINKVIO)
The page on that sex aid makes no mention of this Nexus. It only proves there is something else called "Nexus Maximus". Does not prove that Hasbro was embarassed by their mistake.
The club magazine/website is not third party (obviously).

NotARealWord (talk) 16:26, 7 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I don't take that Erin Brereton work as being illegitimate, sure the name wasn't released yet, but the toy was planned at that time, it was announced, just not named, and the fact being cited is that Landquake is a limb of the Nexus Prime toy, which is it, and was known to be back then, even if "Nexus Prime"'s name hadn't been announced yet.Mathewignash (talk) 17:39, 7 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Well, since it was written back when Nexus hadn't even appeared and we didn't really know anything about him, there's no way it would have given him "extensive coverage". NotARealWord (talk) 09:35, 8 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 01:19, 9 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ya know Mignash, the Brereton book is illegitimate as a source, since it's being used to cite "that Landquake is a limb of the Nexus Prime toy". it doesn't prove that, since it doesn't contain the words, "Nexus Prime" in regards to Landquake. Or anythin synoymous like "mysterious member of the Original Thirteen". The article puts that citation right after "His right arm is formed by the Decepticon Landquake". Doubtful that a book written long before a finalized Nexus design was created would have that information, considering how the toy can be configured so that any member can form any limb, unless the writer made some incredibly lucky guess that Landquake becomes the right arm. So, no keep. Redirect or delete.NotARealWord (talk) 08:38, 9 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per NARW's analysis of the so-called "sources". Reyk _YO! 20:14, 10 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It was a limb (arm) of an (at the time) unnamed combiner, so it's legitimate. Mathewignash (talk) 01:01, 17 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

No, it is not. Reading that book will not tell anyone that Landquake is the right arm part of nexus Prime (or ancient mysterious Thirteen guy, etc.). The way it's used simply doesn't work. It doesn't confirm anything about Nexus unless one combines it with knowledge obtained from other sources (if it just says, unnamed combiner,then it doesn't quite count. It definitely can't prove who becomes which limb like the article suggests). A source has to specifically and unambiguously prove the statement preceding it, even to someone who has absolutely no knowledge on the subject. That's what sources are for. They are not there simply to "save" an article from deletion. NotARealWord (talk) 18:17, 17 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Original thirteen Transformers NotARealWord (talk · contribs) has conclusively established that the sources are unreliable and insufficient in establishing notability. "Nexus Prime" is a valid search term, so it should be redirected to Original thirteen Transformers. Cunard (talk) 22:55, 18 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Merge/Redirect with thorough verification of the sources. The above discussion shows that sourcing was dubious. Muslim lo Juheu (talk) 23:18, 18 March 2011 (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.