Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Old B.O.B.

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 no consensus, not a shred. Gwen Gale (talk) 20:18, 1 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Old B.O.B.

Plot regurgitation about a non-notable robot from a bad film, The Black Hole. I am also nominating the following related page for the exact same reason:

Clarityfiend (talk) 08:44, 24 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect both back to The Black Hole article. Not notable enough for their own articles. Esradekan Gibb ^"Talk" 09:46, 24 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. -- Fabrictramp (talk) 16:56, 24 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect both to the film article as neither character is notable enough to warrant separate articles. I should caution the nominator that expressions of opinion such as "a bad film" shouldn't have a bearing on whether an article is viable or not. 23skidoo (talk) 18:41, 24 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect, despite the fact that the nominator's logic isn't really true. Most of the information on both pages is of higher detail and not present on the main film page (the fact that B.O.B. and V.I.N.CENT are from the same series of robots is rather important, but never hinted at in the main article) although, granted, most of it is non-notable. Also, The Black Hole is an awesome film. Chaparral2J (talk) 15:52, 26 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Leave it alone. Characters V.I.N.CENT. are both notable in the film, and far more notable than some of the Star Wars robots who have their own articles. Moreover, while franchises such as Star Wars, Star Trek, Buffy and Stargate have their own more detailed wikis elsewhere, there's no such detail given on individual movies that do not have multiple movie franchises. The fact that V.I.N.CENT, Maximillian, and Old B.O.B have all had multiple toys, lunchmoxes, colouring books and other merchandise made with their images should indicate the merit of the inclusion of these articles. The fact that these merchandising franchises were in the 70s rather than being recent (like individual Bionicle characters who apparently merit inclusion), should be irrelevant. In other words, had the movie just come out with the same level of merchandising, there'd be no question. Therefore, there should not be a question now. Wikipedia isn't just dedicated to recent popular events. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Citation Not Needed (talk • contribs) 01:23, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Both These are major characters from a major studio film in a time when the industry was undergoing rapid change. If every pokemon character gets an article, then so should these. there must be no ageism, or "because Ive never heard of it" or "because I don't like it" criteria. --Tbmorgan74 (talk) 19:00, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Merge into The Black Hole - I don't think these characters are sufficiently notable to deserve their own articles. (And to Tbmorgan above: we don't have an article on every Pokemon, in fact almost all of them have been deleted for non-notability. These articles aren't any different.) Terraxos (talk) 13:25, 31 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Also, I suggest Maximillian (The Black Hole), another character from the same film, be considered for merging/deletion as well. Terraxos (talk) 13:26, 31 May 2008 (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.