Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Umbrella Corporation

This discussion was subject to a deletion review on 2015 June 23.
For an explanation of the process, see Wikipedia:Deletion review.

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 merge to List of Resident Evil characters. Or some other relevant article, which can be hashed out at the talk page. Stifle (talk) 08:37, 28 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Umbrella Corporation

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Wikipedia:Notability (fiction): Could not find reliable third-party publications on the subject (googled "Umbrella" "james marcus" "resident evil" -chronicles -wiki -wikipedia). As it was probably transcribed fully in the article, the "top ten list" GameInformer reference has not covered the subject sufficiently enough. Furthermore, the whole history section is merely repeating information from the plot sections of the individual games. And the paramilitary units section is leaning towards fancruft. Prime Blue (talk) 12:12, 20 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Games-related deletion discussions. —Prime Blue (talk) 12:32, 20 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. —Prime Blue (talk) 12:32, 20 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think the notability of the game itself can not be questioned. Would it not have been a better choice to tag the article as needing attention/3rd party references, verification, WP:Plot, fancruft (leaning) and/or such, then see if some can be supplied, than to just do a G-search and tag it AfD? I am sure it can not be assumed that if something is not on Google it can't exist or be verified. That would be assuming that all things are listed on Google and I am sure this would not be accurate. All of the other listed problems are solvable not requiring deletion. I am not a fan of this game, and have never played it however, I do feel that a channel followed by Wikipedia policy might be a better option, and would certainly not clog up AfD with undue and maybe premature requests, barring any clear "serious" violations. I also have a small problem with some of the above reasoning, "GameInformer reference has not covered the subject sufficiently enough." This indicates that;

1)- Some information was in fact found (G-search or not?) but,
2)- The editor felt it not "sufficient" on his/her own merit.

My main problems are (among several) either "GameInformer" is not considered a "reliable" third-party source, but this was not used as a reasoning (and "publications" are not the only Wiki- accepted sources), or there is at least one 3rd party source so maybe more. The included "GameInformer" source, provided being reliable, would make the statement, ": Could not find reliable third-party publications on the subject", not accurate. I do feel, but this is not an AfD issue, that the title should be "Umbrella Corporation (Fictional game)" (or something similar), and noted this on the talk page. The tag should be removed pending above listed Wikipedia advocated process or more sound reasoning be supplied. Otr500 (talk) 21:09, 20 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The GameInformer reference is the one in the article itself, probably transcribed in full there (given it is a top ten list). It is a reliable and a third-party source, but it does not go much beyond a trivial mention and a plot summary and thus hardly fulfills the criteria for notability (see "trivial coverage"). Having lots of knowledge on the game series, I think it is nearly impossible to accurately expand this particular article while not just providing plot summaries mixed with very, very hard to verify fancruft (I forgot to mention that this section is also mostly just plot summaries of RE2, RE3, and Survivor). Prime Blue (talk) 23:12, 20 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Merge to the Resident Evil franchise article. or to a list of characters and organizations in Resident Evil article. It is the primary antagonist in the four Resident Evil feature films, and most of the videogames, and functions as a character. 76.66.193.119 (talk) 02:58, 21 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to List of Resident Evil characters (even though it's not strictly a character), or to Resident Evil (the article on the whole series). Either way, it should be drastically cut down - this article basically consists of original research and plot summary not supported by independent reliable sources. Although individual Resident Evil characters such as Albert Wesker may be notable enough for their own articles, I'm not convinced that the Umbrella Corporation is. Robofish (talk) 16:38, 22 July 2010 (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.