Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Butterfree: Difference between revisions

::*??? No one claimed those sources showed notability, they're there to verify facts, how is this refbombing in any capacity? - [[User:Cukie Gherkin|Cukie Gherkin]] ([[User talk:Cukie Gherkin|talk]]) 00:23, 21 September 2024 (UTC)

:::*Because that is the first two points of the [[WP:REFBOMB]] essay - an overkill of citations that briefly namecheck the subject without actually being about the subject, and citations that don't mention the subject and are presented to verify a fact that is not related to the subject's notability. Keep in mind that [[WP:REFBOMB]] ''is'' just an essay, not a policy - I am simply using it to demonstrate the larger issue - the fact that so many trivial citations are needed to be used to try to provide references for the article shows the lack of genuine significant coverage in reliable sources that would allow Buttefree to pass the [[WP:GNG]]. [[User:Rorshacma|Rorshacma]] ([[User talk:Rorshacma|talk]]) 00:34, 21 September 2024 (UTC)

*'''Comment''' As an aside, is there any reason why CBR is unreliable in a way that other Valnet sources are not? I believe that general consensus is that being owned by Valnet is not disqualifying, and the article used here was published prior to CBR's layoffs and use of AI. - [[User:Cukie Gherkin|Cukie Gherkin]] ([[User talk:Cukie Gherkin|talk]]) 00:05, 21 September 2024 (UTC)

*:'''Comment''' per [[Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Video games/Sources/Archive 30#Comic Book Resources]], it seems to be due to a significant degradation of content compared to their old self, and the fact they didn't cover video game subjects until after Valnet bought them, which, additionally, was when their old staff practically all left the moment Valnet bought them. Admittedly I do feel I disagree in its complete unreliability, since it's about equal in terms of quality to the usual Game Rant/Screen Rant, but that was the rationale provided during its initial discussion. I feel if its status should be debated, another discussion at the Sources page would be warranted, but that is likely outside the scope of this AfD. [[User:Pokelego999|Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999]] ([[User talk:Pokelego999|talk]]) 00:20, 21 September 2024 (UTC)