Talk:WWE action figures

@Mrschimpf: @SMBMovieFan: @WaddlesJP13: @Devonian Wombat: @4meter4: @3mi1y: Pinging a few AfD discussion participants- I've removed some of the WP:PROMO product descriptions on its availability violating WP:NPOV and WP:NOT. if you disagree please discuss, thanks! VickKiang (talk) 22:58, 17 October 2022 (UTC)Reply

Article also needs to be verified. The article only have only one citation and that was to the official WWE Mattel site. The article seems to still have WP:PROMO stuff but i also tried removing some of that. Overall? Needs a rewrite and more citations for verification. SMBMovieFan (talk) 23:42, 17 October 2022 (UTC)Reply

I have removed your tagging of promotional text for each section. The problem applies to the entire article, so I have added the tag in the multiple issues template instead. VickKiang (talk) 00:04, 18 October 2022 (UTC)Reply

Although the coverage on the current WWE action figures is fine, there NEEDS to be more citations to be verifed. Yes, this article is notable, and the WP:PROMO is gone, but this article seriously needs to be improved. If not, then the article could be merged into WWE. SMBMovieFan (talk) 15:00, 18 October 2022 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for your interesting reply, but which criteria per WP:MERGE does this meet? A controversial merge would need a discussion, but the unverfiable parts can still be trimmed. That alone IMO isn't a good rationale- there isn't policies or guidelines recommending merging for every article needing cleanup. Besides, no one in the AfD supported merge, do you think that the article is too short or need additional context? VickKiang (talk) 20:02, 18 October 2022 (UTC)Reply

Without the promotional stuff in the article, yeah its way to short. I dont think it is time to merge however. SMBMovieFan (talk) 20:26, 18 October 2022 (UTC)Reply

Thanks, I also disagree with merging. There's consensus per AfD as keep, and 191 words might be slightly short but it's still decent IMHO. VickKiang (talk) 20:40, 18 October 2022 (UTC)Reply