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 keep. (non-admin closure) Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:20, 21 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

List of fictional monkeys (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)

Most monkeys in this list do not have their own article. This list has many entries that are little more than "Unnamed monkey - appears in an episode of show x" or "Some monkey - seen at one point in a video game". We have a category for notable fictional monkeys, which has far fewer items than this list article. See Category:Fictional monkeys. Radiant chains (talk) 12:15, 14 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete as listcruft. THE AMERICAN METROSEXUAL 12:55, 14 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. -- — LinguistAtLarge • Talk  14:54, 14 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment Not to argue that other stuff exists, but we do have several other "list of fictional [insert animal here]"s. This one can probably be cleaned up and sourced, with all of the "untitled"s removed, but I'm not certain. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Many otters • One hammer • HELP)} 18:51, 14 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oh, do we? I wasn't aware of that. THE AMERICAN METROSEXUAL 19:26, 14 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    • Didn't we have a List of fictional turtles here at AfD the other day? Don't remember what happened with it. Drmies (talk) 00:19, 15 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
      • Good memory. That article was merged following its AfD. --Orlady (talk) 23:26, 15 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: per above Niteshift36 (talk) 01:56, 15 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep Article can serve as a navigational aid. The unnamed and non-relevant monkeys can be removed from the list by editing. Their existence has no bearing on the inclusion of monkeys like Mojo Jojo and Dial M for Monkey. - Mgm|^(talk) 08:46, 15 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep They dont need their own article. They just have to be prominent in notable works, which not quite all of them are. Even if one thought they did need an article there are about forty here with their own article, which is surely enough to support a list. My guess is that perhaps another 10 or so could be reasonably written. DGG (talk) 09:29, 15 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - A category doesn't cut it with this type of list. - Peregrine Fisher (talk) (contribs) 00:17, 16 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - a category is merely a navigational tool, it is not to be used to replace content. And further, Gorillas in comics (at least) is very notable, and has been discussed in quite a few secondary sources. It looks to me that the several lists of fictional simians have merely been split due to WP:SIZE. - jc37 18:12, 16 April 2009 (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.