Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mirror Coat

Update: I count 7 votes to delete, 1 to keep, 1 to merge, and 1 sock puppet (User:Demonstford -> User:Slakhan). Counting me as well that makes 8 to delete. I have deleted Mirror Coat and I'll now go and make a link to this discussion on Wikipedia:Archived deletion debates. Wile E. Heresiarch 14:45, 23 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

An article about a techinique in the Pokemon games. Is it really necessary to have a page on every single attack possible in every single video game? I don't think so. Delete. PMC 04:03, 17 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Some things are just too trival...Average Earthman 10:56, 17 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]
Delete is right. - Lucky 6.9 16:47, 17 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]
Would go well in a Wikibooks Pokemon game guide, but not on Wikipedia. -- Cyrius|&#9998 18:46, May 17, 2004 (UTC)
Christ Jesus no. The Land 19:54, 17 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Hopefully this is not the first of many.Beelzebubs 20:31, 17 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]
I believe the usual practice is to keep Pokemon content. We kept the formula for deciding the outcome of battles not long ago. Perhaps there's some place where this is can be properly merged, but if not, keep. Everyking 23:25, 17 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]
- Could you give a cite for that policy? --Ben Brockert 22:52, May 18, 2004 (UTC)
  - I didn't say it was policy, I said practice. I can cite the continued existence of the formula article, if you want me to have to go and figure out the title of it. Everyking 15:58, 19 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. --Ben Brockert 22:52, May 18, 2004 (UTC)
Id say let Everyking go find the article with the formula and merge it into one all encompasing Pokemon strategy article. --Starx 00:45, 22 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]
- ...which, being a how-to, would belong in Wikibooks. PMC 05:07, 22 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep. It's factual info and people will use it (though, not me). --Demonstford 17:17, 22 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]