Wikipedia:Pokémon test

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Hey, if we already have an article for the yellow entity, then we should be able to have an article for the woman in white pants and the man in the black t-shirt too!

The Pokémon test is an argument that was made at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion, before specific Pokémon characters were merged into a list of Pokémon. The basic premise of the argument is that a Wikipedian compares the foo currently nominated for deletion against an article for a character from Pokémon. The Wikipedian then determines if the foo in question is more notable than that Pokémon character, thus seemingly demonstrating the encyclopedic quality of the foo under discussion. By early 2007, these characters were merged after a discussion found most of them non-notable.

History

The Pokémon test is believed to have stemmed from the attempt to curtail the number of individual Pokémon articles by listing them for deletion citing WP:FICT. However, although consensus formed in the Wikipedia:Poképrosal agreed that WP:FICT did actually apply to Pokémon stubs, the formation of WikiProject Pokémon (under various names), and the pledge that all stubs were to be expanded, saw the issue die down somewhat. More recently, the WikiProject has worked on a merge of Pokémon species articles, rendering the test moot. Since then, the Pokémon test is sometimes cited in the inverse: articles on minor fictional characters are now routinely merged into one article, citing the Pokémon merger and WP:POKEMON as the most prominent and influential precedent.

Examples of typical use

(Emphasis added.)

Karen Importance Test

A related, and even more outdated, test was the Karen Importance Test (KIT), involving the citing of the specific Pokémon character Karen's article, for the following reasons:

  1. She seemed to be among the least significant of all the Pokémon characters with their own articles.
  2. Her article had technically survived at least one AFD (however, it was speedily closed because the article was already slated to be merged, so it was not kept on its merits).
  3. When the test was devised, the article looked like this.

This was no longer a valid argument (if it ever was) by the time the Pokémon Test arose, because Karen's article had been merged with other related characters.

Criticism

There were three main criticisms of the Pokémon test that often arose in response to its use:

  1. The first and most common was that the Pokémon themselves aren't notable enough to have their own articles and that the inclusion of so many Pokémon articles was a mistake (see Wikipedia:Inclusion is not an indicator of notability).
  2. Notability of Pokémon characters may not be equivalent to the notability of other subjects; the argument implies that a parallel bar should be set for every type of article.
  3. Finally, an argument that an article is at least as notable as an arbitrary Pokémon is still a subjective argument on the notability of that article, rather than reliance on the primary notability criterion (multiple, independent, reliable sources). Who can be certain that Rhydon really isn't more notable than Uncle Steve's Garage Band, after all?

See also








Creative Commons License