Blaster (Transformers) : Grandmaster Huon ( talk ) 14:39, 20 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Fictional elements , Comics and animation ,  and Toys .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 15:47, 20 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Procedural Keep .  Quick Gnews hits: - https://movieweb.com/transformers-autobots-that-dont-appear-in-the-movies/ - https://bleedingcool.com/collectibles/turn-up-the-tunes-with-transformers-twincast-and-autobot-rewind/ - https://www.cbr.com/cybertronians-who-should-be-playable-in-transformers-reactivate/ - https://www.ign.com/articles/transformers-vintage-g1-autobot-blaster-now-available-for-preorder Suggests lack of Before and that there are sources that can be used to improve the article.  BoomboxTestarossa ( talk ) 17:46, 20 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] But these sources are not enough to justify Blaster his own article, if you believe your case, then write a GA level alternate article for Blaster in your own sandbox.  Grandmaster Huon ( talk ) 20:32, 20 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] I'm afraid you can't command someone to write something you feel is lacking.  If you feel it should be improved, then that lies on you exclusively.  You can ask for help for things like brief reviews and copy editing and the like, but you can't force someone to write something.  It's not the job of us at the AfDs to write these articles or improve them, only to decide on outcomes of what is kept and what stays.  We can leave comments that ask for improvement, but it takes too much time for us to be editing every article that comes through here to a GA level standard.  Pokelego999 ( talk ) 22:41, 20 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] movieweb source is a poor quality listicle.  bleedingcool entry is a review of a single toy.  cbr is another weak listicle.  IGN is not even a review but a short note about a preorder for another toy.  If this is the best that was found - sorry, this is very bad.  Given that the article itself has nothing better (no reception/analysis sections), GNG has not been estabilished by either the article or the discusion here, and so my vote is to redirect this to Autobot or a list of relevant charcter.  Technically you can also consider my vote as one for delete but with preference for WP:SOFTDELETE .  IF better sources are found, ping me and I'll review them.  But, @ BoomboxTestarossa , with all due respect, WP:GOOGLEHITS are not a good way to argue that something is notable.  Please provide SIGCOV analysis of sources in the future, because I am sorry to say I have not been impressed by many links provided in those recent Transformer discussions.  Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | reply here 06:39, 24 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep , per nomination.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.81.183.250 ( talk ) 02:35, 25 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete There is zero notability here, and the previous two keep ! votes either cite very trivial coverage or are nonsensical.  He can be disambiguated as a DABMENTION on the Blaster page, that's about it.  ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ ( ᴛ ) 06:03, 26 August 2023 (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.

Discussion outcome: delete