Login
Login

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Galarian Corsola

=[[:Galarian Corsola]]=

{{REMOVE THIS TEMPLATE WHEN CLOSING THIS AfD|F}}

{{AFD help}}

:{{la|1=Galarian Corsola}} – (View AfDView log | edits since nomination)

:({{Find sources AFD|title=Galarian Corsola}})

I know that this is considered a good article, but the entire first and second paragraphs are uncited, and it is just not notable compared to other Pokemon with now deleted articles. Toketaatalk 14:20, 17 April 2025 (UTC)

:Forgot to add this, but I think it is a great example of WP:NOT. Most cited articles not from 2019 (the release year of Sword and Shield) are just mentioning limited time events that contained the Pokemon. Toketaatalk 14:29, 17 April 2025 (UTC)

:@Toketaa I don't really care much about the outcome of this discussion, but the lead does not need citations per MOS:LEAD so long as the content is specified in the body of the article, just for future reference. Magneton Considerer: Pokelego999 (Talk) (Contribs) 14:32, 17 April 2025 (UTC)

:Keep: I believe this article is well supported by its Reception section and through it passes WP:GNG, which is something previously deleted Pokémon species articles did not do. Additionally as mentioned by Pokelego above, {{green|"the entire first and second paragraphs"}} do not need to be cited as this would fall under MOS:LEAD, ergo it should not be used as a reason to delete this. CaptainGalaxy 16:17, 17 April 2025 (UTC)

:Keep. "It is just not notable" is not a deletion rationale. Keep per the sources in the article. ~ A412 talk! 16:30, 17 April 2025 (UTC)

I am just going to request a close, although some of the sources in the article should be checked. (sources mentioning limited time events, and also the source from 2006) Toketaatalk 18:15, 17 April 2025 (UTC)

:The sources that relate to limited time events are 12, 13, 14, and 15. Toketaatalk 18:19, 17 April 2025 (UTC)

::Those are fine to mention as they are strictly covering the history of the appearances of the species. That is the point of the Appearances section. CaptainGalaxy 19:11, 17 April 2025 (UTC)

::Also if you wish to close the AFD nomination, you can find guidance on the process at WP:WDAFD. CaptainGalaxy 19:13, 17 April 2025 (UTC)

  • Delete The deletion rationale was poor, but in my opinion this article fails WP:GNG. It suffers from significant WP:REFBOMBing, but lacks WP:SIGCOV besides the source from the Journal of Geek Studies. While this particular source is impressive, it is too little to base an article on, and the rest are trivial mentions that just touch on how topical the concept of the Pokemon is and for the most part say the same thing. I wouldn't have created this article if I only found these sources, as they don't demonstrate some tangible analysis. This is easy to explain, since the majority of Pokemon don't feature as characters in their own right. There could be another angle, such as their gameplay, but simple commentary on their design is superficial and happens with the majority of newly-introduced Poke's somewhere. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 09:17, 18 April 2025 (UTC)
  • :@Zxcvbnm, there is a valid AtD in List of generation VIII Pokémon, where the species is listed, so even at worst I'd argue that a redirect at least would be justified. Magneton Considerer: Pokelego999 (Talk) (Contribs) 00:58, 19 April 2025 (UTC)
  • ::I am also fine with merge to that list in that case. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 01:08, 19 April 2025 (UTC)
  • keep per the nominator's request to close the afd although I think the sourcing is good regardless as there are plenty of sources that cover the galarian version repersenting climate change https://www.gamerevolution.com/news/618017-pokemon-sword-and-shield-galarian-corsola-was-morphed-by-climate-change https://www.polygon.com/2019/11/19/20972466/pokemon-sword-shield-climate-change-galarian-corsola-cursola in addition to the sources covering the Pokemon in game Scooby453w (talk) 20:59, 18 April 2025 (UTC)

{{Reflist-talk}}