Avatar Wiki:Votes for deletion

Profile image change

Profile quote change

Votes for deletion

Speedy • 1 • 2 • 3 • 4 • 5 • 6 • 7 • 8 • 9 • 10 • 11 • 12 • 13

In order to speed up the process, it can be beneficial to withhold your vote when you agree with the majority. Adding your own vote will reset the "three days without comment" waiting period for consensus.

Votes for deletion is where discussions on whether an article should be deleted are held.

• Ensure you are familiar with our deletion policy. When nominating a page for discussion here, add {{VfD}} to the top of that page.
• Use {{vote delete}} to support deleting a page, {{vote keep}} to support keeping it and {{vote merge}} to support merging the information from a page into another page. This is still a discussion; provide a reason for your position.

Opal's relationships

[show] • CLOSED • edit

This discussion is closed. The result of this discussion was: Page deleted. Please do not edit this discussion. Delete — I don't see much use for this page. Opal is still a minor character, and the only significant relationship she has at the moment is with Bolin. And even that is still minor. Lucid☆Star 15:18, August 17, 2014 (UTC) Delete — Per LS. Not much to be had for her relationships at this point. PSUAvatar14 Want to have a word? 15:23, August 17, 2014 (UTC) Keep — This is an encyclopedia of avatar world. We have enough Info about Opal's relationship. so it should be added to the wiki. Mkamind (wall • contribs) 15:55, August 17, 2014 (UTC) Delete — Looking over the article, I don't think there is really enough content to warrant such a page. Opal's relationship with her family and maybe Bolin could probably be expanded to have enough content, but beyond that I do not see there is much that could be said, and only two notable connections is not really enough to warrant a page. HAMMEROFTHØR (wall) • 16:17, August 17, 2014 (UTC) Delete — Per my earlier objections against the creation of the page. Relationship pages are not meant to be mere recollections of "character A spoke with character B" in this, this, and this instance. Those pages are meant to provide a deeper insight in the personality of the character and the "why" of their interactions with certain characters. Opal does not have enough of those profound moments to warrant a relationship page at this moment. Lady Lostris /  SOAP 16:25, August 17, 2014 (UTC) Keep — I agree with what Mkamind said. We have enough true information about this and it can still be expanded if Opal appears throughout book 4 as well. --Avatar Rowena (wall • contribs) 17:00, August 17, 2014 (UTC) As a general reminder: We create a page to group relevant information that is present. We do not create a page in the off chance that relevant information may someday be released. Lady Lostris /  SOAP 17:09, August 17, 2014 (UTC) Keep — Opal has had enough interaction with the different main characters to be giving her own page. Also, the 'not being a main character' argument is invalid, since Yue and Ty Lee (for example) also have their own relationship page. Opal is an important and vivid character in the third book, who happens to be featured on the SDCC promo poster, they don't just put a character on there who's not important. BelgiumHelper (talk • contribs) 19:18, August 17, 2014 (UTC) The judgement on whether a character should have a relationship page doesn't have anything to do with whether they are a main character or not. What matters is whether there is enough content in regards to their interactions with other characters to warrant such a page. For Opal, I do not believe enough such content exists to warrant keeping the page. If in the future we get enough content, then it can be remade as needed. HAMMEROFTHØR (wall) • 17:46, August 17, 2014 (UTC) I like to point out that Opal being a minor character was not used as a reason to delete the page on itself. It was used to refer to her very minor role thus far in the serious, a minor role that has left us with very little to nearly nothing to work with. (Though just a note: Yue and Ty Lee are both listed as major characters, so using them as examples to defend the page of a minor character is a bit unconventional as you can't just make a parallel comparison between two different situations.) And as said before, we do not create pages in the off chance that she may get a bigger role in the future. If she happens to actually show a deep connection with several characters that warrant a page, the page can easily be recreated. However, we do no keep sub-standard pages around in hopes that we may one day fill them with useful information. That's not how we work. We wait for useful information and then create a page. Lady Lostris /  SOAP 17:51, August 17, 2014 (UTC) Delete — As spoken of before, Opal doesn't have any solid relationship shown in the show. In this Book, relationships have been toned down, and hence, Opal's relationships aren't that significant with respect to the storyline whatsoever. There is hardly any content that can be added. Moon's Haze (talk • contribs) 17:26, August 17, 2014 (UTC)

Insurrection of the Red Lotus

[show] • CLOSED • edit

This discussion is closed. The result of this discussion was: Page kept. Please do not edit this discussion. Delete — I think we should delete the Insurrection of the Red Lotus page... any info on there can be found on other pages, such as the ORL page, and the korra page, so i don't think there's any real need for this page. Intelligence4 (wall • contribs) 04:42, August 28, 2014 (UTC) Keep — Per the reasons I gave for the Anarchy in the Earth Kingdom vote. DyingFlameTsui (wall • contribs) 09:46, August 28, 2014 (UTC) Keep — I get that the information is elsewhere on the wiki, but all of Korra's information is on Asami and Mako and Bolin's pages is you add all those contents together. The reason she has her own article is because she has enough info to require it and the article focuses on her. The same goes for the Insurrection, which also happens to be an important event in the chronology that would probably get an article if it were only an intro and minor history long, like the Battle of Han Tui. Krazykid51 10:09, August 28, 2014 (UTC) Keep — Not being biased as I created my page myself, but seeing that the major conflicts in the Avatar world have pages (Chin's revolution, Hundred Year War, Harmony Restoration Movement, Equalist revolution and recently, the Water Tribe Civil War, which I also created myself), I think the page should stay. IAmNothing712 (wall • contribs) 02:56, August 30, 2014 (UTC)

Anarchy in the Earth Kingdom

[show] • CLOSED • edit

This discussion is closed. The result of this discussion was: Page kept. Please do not edit this discussion. Delete — I think we should delete the Anarchy in the Earth Kingdom page... as i said for the insurrection of the RL page, i don't think there's any need for this page, as the info on it is already stated elsewhere. Intelligence4 (wall • contribs) 04:46, August 28, 2014 (UTC) Keep — The complex prelude of this conflict, as well as the conflict itself is noteworthy. Also, to argue that the info can be found elsewhere is not really a reason; all the infos about the Battle at Wulong forest can be found elsewhere, but it still is one of the most important battles in Avatar history and can not be omitted. DyingFlameTsui (wall • contribs) 09:43, August 28, 2014 (UTC) Keep — Per Insurrection vote. Krazykid51 10:10, August 28, 2014 (UTC) Keep — Well, we keep the information nearly everything about A:TLA and TLoK, as long as it meets our standards; and I think it'll be informative to every readers of our encyclopedia. AcerEvan ( Contributions · ) 10:57, August 28, 2014 (UTC) Keep — I'd say at least wait until Book 4 comes out, it seems pretty likely to me they are going to deal with it again there. It also allows much greater detail than the synopi of the episodes it is so far featured in. AvatarAang7 23:52, August 28, 2014 (GMT +1) Keep — I think something like this we should keep it explains the build up for centuries that would lead to the anarchy.Superbike10 (wall • contribs) 00:34, August 29, 2014 (UTC) Comment — Since this wiki doesn't have a neutral or comment template ^_^;;. I was thinking of a merger article involving Earth Kingdom events. The Anarchy article itself is nicely done. -- Bunai82 (talk) 02:44, August 31, 2014 (UTC) We have a {{Vote merge}} template, so you can suggest merging it if you choose ^^" Frui (🌹 • 🐝 • 🐝🐝) 03:15, August 31, 2014 (UTC) Keep — there is no use to deleate it at all as it is very noteworthy and should be kept.--Gsmith1030 21:42, September 1, 2014 (UTC) Keep — I think keep because it is a well established page. Another thing is that it will most likely be touched upon in book 4. Also the Red Lotus uprising only had to deal with liberating the people from oppressive leaders, and once they were done the RL's part is done and it is up to the people. This is shown when Zaheer tells the city about the assassination, but he says it isn't his place to tell them what to do. Since the Anarchy is not taken part in totally by RL operatives I say keep. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 0zai (wall • contribs) 22:36, September 2, 2014 (UTC)

Huan's sculpture

[show] • CLOSED • edit

This discussion is closed. The result of this discussion was: Page kept. Please do not edit this discussion. Merge — I vote we merge the Huan's sculpture page with the Art page. the page is very short, and the sculpture doesn't have any major plot significance to warrant having its own page. Intelligence4 (wall • contribs) 13:48, September 10, 2014 (UTC) Keep — We have plenty of shorter pages that are warranted; I see no reason to delete or merge this article. It stands fine on its own. Frui (🌹 • 🐝 • 🐝🐝) 14:09, September 10, 2014 (UTC) Keep — This wiki is well-known for the information of every inch in Avatar Universe, and I think this page deserves its place on this wiki. Per Frui. AcerEvan ( Contributions · ) 16:35, September 10, 2014 (UTC) Keep — Make it about Huan's sculptures in general, not just that one. Omnibender - Talk - Contributions 16:41, September 10, 2014 (UTC) If we are to keep that page on its own though, then we'd have to create a page for every piece of art in the series. i just don't think that's necessary, especially considering we can just have all the information in one place: same info, still covering every inch of avatar, just less cluttered. Also as omni said, if we do in fact keep the page, we should make it about all of his sculptures. Intelligence4 (wall • contribs) 17:13, September 10, 2014 (UTC) Keep — Per Acer, we have many short pages like this one for example --Bahjy1 Message Wall Blog 17:31, September 10, 2014 (UTC) Keep — Just as a small note, pages on the wiki are not kept on the basis of "we have this small page, therefore we should have this other small page". Each page is kept on its own merits and whether it is of a reasonable length. Therefore, the existence of other small pages doesn't mean we have to keep this page, and keeping this page doesn't mean we would have to create pages for every small piece of art if there was no merits in doing so. Now, in my view this page should be kept. It is of a reasonable length, and there is enough significant, individual history surrounding the sculpture that merit it being kept as a separate page, and not merged elsewhere. HAMMEROFTHØR (wall) • 21:26, September 10, 2014 (UTC)

Silk Road Bridge

[show] • CLOSED • edit

This discussion is closed. The result of this discussion was: Page kept. Please do not edit this discussion. Delete —This article feels to me like it's there just to announce the trivia that it is a reference to the real Silk Road Trading Route. The page doesn't hold much information, and it could, in my opinion, be transcribed onto the main page of Republic City's locations or on the main page of The Aftermath. It plays a very minor role in just that one episode, and really, it could have been anywhere in the city. User: AvatarAang7 12:58, September 28, 2014 (UTC) Keep — I think the information contained within the article is reasonable enough to warrant it being kept as a separate page. The page was created to inform about the bridge itself, the trivia point is merely an addition to that, and the fact it played only a minor role doesn't matter if a reasonable article can be created from the information. HAMMEROFTHØR (wall) • 21:56, September 28, 2014 (UTC) Keep — So what if it doesn't hold much information? The page about the shrewish woman with the talking mole of shrewishness doesn't hold much information, but that's not a deleted page. It seems to me that this deserves a page as much as the Brooklyn Bridge deserves a page on Wikipedia, as it seems that important in-universe, despite its short appearance. SorcererSupreme21 (wall • contribs) 22:50, September 28, 2014 (UTC)

Unalaq's ship

[show] • CLOSED • edit

This discussion is closed. The result of this discussion was: Page kept. Please do not edit this discussion. Delete — This page serves little practical value. The difference between it and many of the other Water Tribe ships is negligible at best, and the information could be shortened and put on another page if need be. The only major difference is the fact that it was used by Unalaq. Frui (🌹 • 🐝 • 🐝🐝) 08:48, October 19, 2014 (UTC) Keep — The meere fact, that it was used by Unalaq is important, as it gives the ship a special meaning. I don't thing that we saw a ship like this except for Unalaq's, so it must be one of a kind. Like Aang's staff or Sokka's sword. AvatarfanSLO (Wall) 12:13, October 19, 2014 (UTC) Just because we saw only one, doesn't mean that it "must be" the only one. Aside from it being Unalaq's, there is very little to differentiate it from other ships. Frui (🌹 • 🐝 • 🐝🐝) 10:23, October 19, 2014 (UTC) Keep — We've seen many other vehicles just once, and it's we have a precedent for it. The various airship articles could easily be condensed in a single article, but the specifics about each of them warrants their articles. Omnibender - Talk - Contributions 12:18, October 19, 2014 (UTC)

Outpost soldiers

[show] • CLOSED • edit

This discussion is closed. The result of this discussion was: Page kept. Please do not edit this discussion. Delete — The relevant information of these two characters is already incorporated in the history section of Kuvira's army. The only info "lost" would be their voice actors, though they are credited on their own page, so the information is still on the wiki. Lady Lostris /  SOAP 15:29, October 24, 2014 (UTC) Keep — I personaly believe, that we should keep this article. In contrast to other members of Kuvira's army these two had a much longer screen time debut than others, we even learned about the personalities. And this is the avatar wiki, where we want to have every small bit of information tidied up. AvatarfanSLO (Wall) 17:37, October 24, 2014 (UTC) Yes, we most definitely want to document all relevant information, which we already had done before the creation of said page. Lady Lostris /  SOAP 15:40, October 24, 2014 (UTC) Yes, but they had quite an important role. They were the reason that Korra was found. That makes them relevant and they deserve a propper page. AvatarfanSLO (Wall) 17:51, October 24, 2014 (UTC) Yes, that makes them most certainly relevant to be documented, which, again, had already been done before the creation of the page. Lady Lostris /  SOAP 16:00, October 24, 2014 (UTC) Ok, let me put it this way. We have a page for the Fire Ferrets cosplayers who had a screentime of 1, maybey 2 seconds, but we should delete a page made for characters who had several minutes of screen time. For me, that doesn't make any sence. AvatarfanSLO (Wall) 10:47, October 26, 2014 (UTC) It likely doesn't make sense because you are comparing the wrong things with each other. Those cosplayers have no other place to go. There is no general page on which the information regarding them can be listed. Those soldiers, however, do. All the information regarding their relevant actions had already been documented before the page was even created. As such, their separate page became a duplicate of the info covered on the Kuvira's soldiers page. We are an Avatar-encyclopedia, meaning that we document everything regarding to the series. However, in no way does that have to mean that everything has to have its separate page. It just means that it needs to be documented on a relevant and logical page, which has been done. Lady Lostris /  SOAP 11:01, October 26, 2014 (UTC) I'm sorry, but I dissagree. If you say, that we should have all articles listed encyclopedia style, then, by your logics, the Fire Ferrets cosplayers page should be listed in the Organisations of the World Of Avatar page, and not be a separate page. But it shouldn't be, because every article that has meaning, every character that has a story and characteristics and each event that has historical value should have its own page. AvatarfanSLO (Wall) 12:47, October 26, 2014 (UTC) I guess we'll just then have to agree to disagree, because your notion of "every article that has meaning, every character that has a story and characteristics and each event that has historical value should have its own page" is not how things are done on this wiki. Lady Lostris /  SOAP 12:00, October 26, 2014 (UTC) Delete —, per LL. Intelligence4 (wall • contribs) 17:48, October 24, 2014 (UTC) Delete — irrelevant matter, irrelevant characters Airbender Master (wall • contribs) 23:44, October 24, 2014 (UTC) Keep — They are minor characters, but they had enough screen time and were given enough personality to distinguish them as notable characters in and of themselves rather than just lumping them in with the rest of Kuvira's army.Ssbbisnumber1 (wall • contribs) 05:15, October 26, 2014 (UTC) Keep — I think that this article should be kept; yes, some of their history (and actually, reading through the article, the amount seems to be only minimal) is shared with that included in the article for Kuvira's army, but that it always going to be true for characters that are part of a group, so I don't see that as much justification for not keeping the page, particularly given that they also have some history that is distinct from Kuvira's army, i.e. their interaction with Ikki, and which comprises the majority of the information on the page. So, overall, I think the page should be kept. HAMMEROFTHØR (wall) • 21:50, October 28, 2014 (UTC) Keep — Per HammerOfThor. I really couldn't have said it better myself. Tono555wall-my contributions 21:57, October 28, 2014 (UTC) Keep — I really dont see a reason to delete it at all.--Gsmith1030 05:20, October 30, 2014 (UTC) Delete — Hmmm, it's a tricky one, but I have to agree with LL. Everything that needs to be mentioned about these characters already has been on Kuvira's army page and the page for the actual episode. Maybe if they reappear perhaps it would warrant their own page, but as is I don't think it's necessary. --Bomochu (wall • fanon) 07:22, October 30, 2014 (UTC)

Equalist Chi blockers

[show] • CLOSED • edit

This discussion is closed. The result of this discussion was: Page will be merged with Equalists. Please do not edit this discussion. Merge — This page is nearly an entire copy/paste of the Equalists page -which is obvious, since many Equalists are also chi blockers, since that was their greatest advantage again benders. There is no need to have another page detailing all the history of the Equalists. At best, the chi blockers could get their own paragraph on the Equalist page, but an entire page with duplicate information is not necessary. Lady Lostris /  SOAP 19:57, November 1, 2014 (UTC) Keep —/ Merge — Tey are still a specialised group in the Equalist forces. Not all Equalists are chi blockers. So, I maybey agree merging the page, but it would be better to keep the page, because they are a special ops grop, like the Terra Team in the Earth Kingdom Armed Forces. AvatarfanSLO 21:03, November 1, 2014 (UTC) I know that not all Equalists are chi blockers, but most of the Equalists that had a notable history are. And that notable history is already covered elsewhere, thus making that page nearly a clone of the other page. As said above, the only thing that makes that page relevant is that is focuses slightly more on the chi blocking aspect, but if we were to cut out all the irrelevant/duplicate info, we only have a paragraph left or something. As such, I propose to move that paragraph to the main Equalist page and delete the separate "Equalist chi blockers". Also, the mere fact that they're a special ops group -which they're not really, considering that most Equalists are chi blockers due to it being the most effective weapon against benders in one-on-one combat along with the electrified glove- is not a sufficient reason to keep the page around considering its largely irrelevant nature of having duplicated information from the main Equalists page. Also, we don't keep/delete things based on arguments of the nature "because A, then there must be B". Every page is gauged in concreto, to making parallels with other groups is irrelevant. Lady Lostris /  SOAP 20:24, November 1, 2014 (UTC) Merge — Per the reasoning given. This page is pretty much redundant. PSUAvatar14 Want to have a word? 20:57, November 1, 2014 (UTC) Delete — Not much to merge that isn't already on the page, and I don't think a separate section for chi blockets is at all necessary since the organization's use of chi blocking is extensively referenced and described throughout the article already. Water Spout 05:13, November 2, 2014 (UTC)

The Last Airbender

[show] • CLOSED • edit

This discussion is closed. The result of this discussion was: Page made into a redirect and the info kept as a disambiguation page. Please do not edit this discussion. Delete — Merge — I do not see the added value of this page beyond confusion. "The Last Airbender" is wildly known to be the title of the movie, which is named "Film:The Last Airbender" on this wiki. Since most wiki users do not know how to work with and link to the different portals on this wiki, it would make more sense for "The Last Airbender" to be a redirect to the movie page than a glorified disambiguation page. Lady Lostris /  SOAP 07:20, May 8, 2015 (UTC) Merge Keep — This page was originally created to reveal the articles comments after a botched move (see revision history). Since article comments are no longer viewable anyway, we could change back to a regular redirect, i.e., "#REDIRECT Film:The Last Airbender" . There are thousands of comments hidden under this page so I would not delete it outright. FYI, Viacom used tsdr.uspto.gov/documentviewer?caseId=sn85016855&docId=SPE20130308145039#docIndex=6&page=1 as trademark specimen for "The Last Airbender". — Hasdi Bravo • 10:50, May 8, 2015 (UTC) While Viacom may have used that name as well, that is largely irrelevant to the browsing experience of our visitors. Hardly anyone comes here with a knowledge of how Viacom deals and labels things. They come here based on the name of an episode/movie that they know. The Last Airbender is to nearly every fan the name of the movie, not the entire franchise or a reference to the series. Lady Lostris /  SOAP 10:57, May 8, 2015 (UTC) I'm not sure on the last part anymore. :( If you do a twitter.com/search?f=realtime&q=thelastairbender%20-avatar" search on "thelastairbender" without "Avatar"], a commenter could be referring to the movie as easily as "the series, not the sh***y movie". But like I said, article comments has been disabled so the main reason why I like to keep this as a separate is now moot. I'm fine if we change it back to a regular redirect. — Hasdi Bravo • 14:53, May 8, 2015 (UTC) Delete — while it could indeed be useful, it seems rather pointless and not just a standard disambiguation page. I have never once noticed the existence of the page and I do not believe it will be missed. A simple redirect shall suffice. Duke of  Skibbington Fanon - Wall 06:56, May 10, 2015 (UTC) Keep — I'm not exactly clear on what "confusion" would come from keeping this page. Someone looking/searching for The Last Airbender is primarily going to be looking for the film, but the game and soundtrack both come under this name as well; this is entirely why we have disambiguation pages, for articles that have the same or similar titles. For someone looking for the film, there is an easily noticeable link to said article which they can click on; for those looking for the game, soundtrack, or series, the same. I am at a loss as to see what part of this process creates confusion, and thus why the page should be deleted. HAMMEROFTHØR (wall) • 21:31, May 10, 2015 (UTC) In light of this argument, I am changing my vote to Keep. If it is still a concern for others, we could just rename the page to "The Last Airbender (disambiguation)" or something. — Hasdi Bravo • 14:52, May 13, 2015 (UTC) If consensus is to keep it, it will be renamed to the standard disambiguation page and this name will be a redirect to the movie, since that's basically how everything on this wiki has worked thus far. As for HoT's argument, where the confusion comes from is already explained in my first comment. The argument that we don't need this easy redirect based on there being an "easily noticeable link to said article which they can click on" would mean that we should also do away with many of our disambiguation pages, since there are "easily noticeable link to said article[s] which they can click on" in the navigation bar. Lady Lostris /  SOAP 19:56, May 13, 2015 (UTC) Sounds good to me. To prevent RC flood (due to the hidden comments) should we decide to rename this page, I suggest you paste the entire page content into a new page "The Last Airbender (disambiguation)" and then replace the page with with "#REDIRECT Film:The Last Airbender". Later. — Hasdi Bravo • 02:40, May 14, 2015 (UTC)

Template:Split

[show] • CLOSED • edit

This discussion is closed. The result of this discussion was: Page deleted. Please do not edit this discussion. Delete — This is simply unneeded, we never use it. Nowadays, when article needs to be split, it is just done so based on previous standing consensus/practice, or it is the subject of a War Room discussion and the consensus there will decide. The template itself has no meaning, because just announcing future plans is rather irrelevant. Lady Lostris /  SOAP 08:08, July 27, 2015 (UTC) Delete — Per Lostris' reasoning; it isn't a template that we ever make use of anymore, so there seems no reason to keep it. HAMMEROFTHØR (wall) • 21:36, July 27, 2015 (UTC) Delete — What's the point in having it if it's not going to be used anymore? Tono555 22:54, July 27, 2015 (UTC)

More About Spirit Portals

[show] • CLOSED • edit

This discussion is closed. The result of this discussion was: Page deleted. Please do not edit this discussion. Delete — No need for this page, but I wasn't certain whether it constituted speedy deletion. All the information is essentially a repeat of what is already detailed in the spirit portal page, and the rest is extraneous history that is already noted in the appropriate pages. Water Spout 04:31, December 10, 2015 (UTC) Delete — Per Water Spout. --AvatarRokus Ghost (Message me • Read my fanon) 04:45, December 10, 2015 (UTC)

Platinum

[show] • CLOSED • edit

This discussion is closed. The result of this discussion was: Page deleted. Please do not edit this discussion. Delete — Considering we have and have had similar pages, I reckon it's best to put this through a community vote. I propose to delete the newly created platinum page for the simple reason that it doesn't bring any new information to the wiki. All relevance to platinum, namely it being unbendable metal, is already covered on the metalbending page. The only other relevant information, the extended history section, is also covered already where necessary. As such, this page fall under the same usefulness as pages such as "apple" and "bamboo" we had in the past. I reckon someone may draw a parallel between the existence of this page and the mercury page, but then I'd like to point out that the latter exists because of its plot relevance, namely Korra's poisoning and subsequent inability to access the Avatar State properly for the larger part of book 4. Platinum had a similar use, with it being the substance the enormous mecha tank was built from, but that is already covered on that page. Lady Lostris /  SOAP 20:27, June 11, 2017 (UTC) Delete — Per LL. --AvatarRokus Ghost (Message me • Read my fanon) 21:53, June 11, 2017 (UTC)

No active discussions. Refresh?