User talk:Pyode

Speedy deletion of S.T.A.R.S. (Resident Evil)

A tag has been placed on S.T.A.R.S. (Resident Evil), requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G4 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be a repost of material that was previously deleted following a deletion debate, such as at articles for deletion. Under the specified criteria, where an article has substantially identical content to that of an article deleted after debate, and any changes in the content do not address the reasons for which the material was previously deleted, it may be deleted at any time.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the article's talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Ridernyc (talk) 01:19, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Talk page of article

The reason this article was sited for deletion was a result of inadequate source material. I am in the process of re-instituting this page using cited material. However this will take a few days for me to do this so please bear with me. All I need is some time.
--Pyode (talk) 01:28, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

using the instruction booklet and other primary sources is not good enough. If you insist recreate it in your user space and then show it at deletion review. Ridernyc (talk) 01:48, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Can you tell me why using a primary source, a source directly from the material that is being discussed is not good enough? What better source is there than something directly from the instruction booklet printed with the game? How is that different than directly quoting Hamlet in an article about Shakespeare? Also, as for recreating it elsewhere, then moving it here, I see no reason to do this. As of right now the article has adequate information and, in my personal opinion, adequate citation so I think it is fine where it is. I simply hope to add more information at a later date. I also hope, now that there is actually an article for it, other fans will be able to add even more information.

--Pyode (talk) 01:53, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia relies on secondary sources for the most part, to avoid conflicts of interest and original research. While primary sources can be used to back up certain claims, a page which has no secondary sources may violate notability guidelines. --TeaDrinker (talk) 02:10, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

From WP:FICT

This guideline is a detailed extension of two excerpts:

From Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not#PLOT:

Wikipedia articles on published works (such as fictional stories) should contain real-world context and sourced analysis, offering detail on a work's development, impact or historical significance, not solely a detailed summary of that work's plot. A brief plot summary may be appropriate as an aspect of a larger topic.

From Wikipedia:Notability:

A topic is presumed to be notable if it has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject.

For articles about fictional concepts, reliable secondary sources cover information such as sales figures, critical and popular reception, development, cultural impact, and merchandise; this information describes the real-world aspects of the concept, so it is real-world content.

Based on this reasoning and the above excerpts, fictional concepts can be presumed notable if they have received substantial coverage in reliable secondary sources.

Ridernyc (talk) 02:12, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

If this whole debate is in regards to the "notability" of S.T.A.R.S. then I don't see why this is even an issue. The Resident Evil series is a multi-million dollar video game franchise that spans 10 separate games and cameo appearances in many others, 3 blockbuster movies, 8 novels, and even a theme park attraction in Japan. S.T.A.R.S. is a very important part of the series as four of the members are playable characters in at least one of the games each and many others play important rolls in the storyline. 5 of the 12 members even have there own pages on Wikipedia. --Pyode (talk) 02:29, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Userfied

Although the article S.T.A.R.S. (Resident Evil) is a fair candidate for WP:CSD#G4 as a substantial recreation of deleted material, the only additions to which do not address the concerns for which it was deleted, I have userfied the article at User:Pyode to give you an opportunity to address those concerns if you are able. Please note that at the deletion discussion, the reason cited for deletion was lack of "real-world documentation to establish notability and meet the verifiability guidelines". While the game itself may be notable, individual concepts within it may not be. If you believe the closure of the original discussion was unjustified, please feel free to use deletion review, but do not continue to repost the article unless you are able to address the concerns for which it was deleted. We welcome your help in trying to improve Wikipedia, and we request you to follow these instructions. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 03:37, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Your note

Thank you for your note. I have replied at my talk page. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 04:04, 2 January 2008 (UTC)