Deletion of List of Warriors characters

Comment: Looks like it can be kept with #Lists of fictional elements.  I do agree that the article is too long and the article needs to be shorten significantly.  However,  may not be the best option.  The point of  is that sometimes restarting an article takes less effort than fixing it.  In this case, however, the references are all mostly non-online sources so restarting may take a lot of effort.  It also seems like a lot of the content can simply be removed outright for completely being unsourced, so it may take less effort than expected to fix the article
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:NFICT||WP:TNT||WP:TNT)

Comment: This is something that belongs on fandom. This is so far  that it literally fits the exact definition. "Fancruft is a term sometimes used in Wikipedia to imply that a selection of content is of importance only to a small population of enthusiastic fans of the subject in question." It isn't well written, it's citations are poor and too few for the 470,000 bytes this article takes up
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Fancruft (WP:FANCRUFT)

Comment: There are several areas that need to be trimmed (the excessively in-universe parts, and the long descriptions about minor characters), but a list of characters in a creative work is a perfectly valid |stand-alone list topic
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Stand-alone lists (WP:SALAT)

Comment: per . This list is exemplary of |how not to write about fictional topics. It lacks |independent reliable sources and fails to explain |how the topic itself is notable, even with the loosey-goosey application of . Blow it up and start over
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Blow it up and start over (WP:TNT||WP:WAF||WP:RS||WP:N||WP:LISTN)