Basically no SIGCOV to speak of for these characters, everything is a mention in the context of something else. (Praise for the concert is not necessarily for the characters themselves). Sources are entirely trivial mentions of the characters or about something related to them that they don't inherit notability from. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 14:48, 30 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Creator keep/don't merge - When directed towards the characters, praise for the concerts should definitely count, and the concerts have basically begun separating themselves from Splatoon promotion either way. REFBOMBing is a relic of when I was checking the reliability of all sources that were usable when the article was a userspace draft and it is still pending cleanup from me because the article isn't even 48 hours old. The characters are considered the mascots of the series, had their own lore miniseries that praise towards definitely counts as towards them, and have been considered standalone idols and vocaloids. The reception may not be as strong as that towards Pearl and Marina and there may not be too many articles about just them, but to say that these have no standalone notability or SIGCOV at all is absurd. NegativeMP1 (talk) 16:42, 30 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

If you are saying it is absurd then I would really like to see the WP:THREE best sources you believe encompass significant coverage of the duo so people can decide. There are a huge amount of sources in the article but most are tangential mentions or primary sources. Reducing it to a few "best" sources will make it much more clear, and as it says on said page, I would not mind if the article existed, I just think the sources aren't there to support it. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 16:49, 30 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

https://www.vg247.com/splatoon-2s-squid-sisters-stories-is-some-tragically-effective-viral-marketing - Extensive coverage of the Squid Sister Stories, comparing the lore of the characters to real world relationship loss and "I'd just feel terrible if I was forced to choose a side."

https://www.kotaku.com.au/2016/07/splatoons-final-splatfest-is-already-tearing-everyone-apart/ - Documents the fan outrage when forced to choose one over the other.

https://repositorio.pucrs.br/dspace/bitstream/10923/20485/2/Live_Projections_of_Deceased_Artists.pdf - Academic study on holographic concerts and deceased artists, cites the Squid Sisters as a prime example of holographic concerts alongside Hatsune Miku. Describes the concerts of the characters as a spinoff somewhat disconnected from Splatoon itself, and the audience/fan demand for it.

I would argue that WP:THREE isn't the best criteria to use here but those are the three that I would argue prove the notability the most, alongside all of the other mentions and articles about how they made articles.

I will say though that if the article is decided to be merged, there should actually be a section for the Squid Sisters somewhere, because up until I made the article, there was nothing in depth for them anywhere at all. NegativeMP1 (talk) 17:06, 30 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

In response to that, I'd say - the first one is for Squid Sisters Stories, and I'd argue is primarily about the web serial rather than the characters. If there were more like that, there could be an argument for the web story being notable, but I think that is the only one that goes into that sort of depth.

The Kotaku article is well, not significant. It's mostly fan-made content put in a big list. The third also appears trivial, mentioning Splatoon for a couple of sentences.

I think it's possible the concerts featuring them or just Splatoon concerts in general are notable as an event, I don't think that should be conflated with the characters themselves being independently notable though.

I am not opposed to an independent section for Callie and Marie within the game article of course, I do think they got at least some mentions. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 17:16, 30 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This is not me rubbing it in re: Toriel, but it's important, I think, to point out that all of the sources, save for one, were about Undertale, not Toriel, so I don't thik that being about the Squid Sisters Stories is much different. Even the one source wasn't about Toriel, but rather, featured her as a significant part of the article. In this case, I think Callie and Marie clears. - Cukie Gherkin (talk) 18:15, 30 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I would disagree that most of the sources did not talk specifically about Toriel, but I was fine with it becoming part of a character list since everyone clearly disagreed. A list of characters is a fine enough compromise in my book. "Hypocrisy therefore keep" is not really a rationale. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 18:58, 30 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't say keep, I'm not participating in the !vote. I'm explaining my confusion for why you held the belief that something I'd consider to have weaker sourcing was notable, but this is not. I also didn't say they didn't talk specifically about Toriel, I said that they weren't about her. - Cukie Gherkin (talk) 19:02, 30 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

There are more sources that talk about the concerts and the miniseries that I didn't list, in fact there are a lot like that for the miniseries. You told me to do THREE, so I did THREE, even though a lot of them may as well be equal. And if the miniseries and concerts were independently notable, who did the concerts star?

Along with that, I believe that a large amount of information for the Squid Sisters Stories being on the Splatoon series article would be slightly jarring. The character article was going to serve as a place to put information for their concerts and miniseries as well as the coverage for the characters, though again it wasn't finished yet. Not that I am not opposed to having it in the series article though, as something is better than nothing, but I think the material related to the characters or things about them is enough to warrant being standalone. NegativeMP1 (talk) 05:13, 31 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment I am not going to vote on this matter, but I am going to point out to the nominator that there does seem to be more notability here than for some subjects he has argued for in the past of his own work such as Felyne. That isn't arguing WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS, but instead suggesting the nominator should consider consistency in their approach towards notability. More directly however I will point out that this is not an example of a "RefBomb" (I've dealt with Niemti articles, this is NOT a refbomb...), and that the nominator should really once again exercise some tact so as to not come across as WP:BITE-y with their statements about the article's editor.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 22:58, 30 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  Apologies if it could be seen as BITE, I edited it to rephrase it so it is not directed at anyone in particular. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 08:38, 31 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose merge, I think the article is on the right side of notable based on the sources. I wouldn't necessarily be opposed to a merge into a "List of Splatoon characters" in the future, in principle, but that's not the discussion at hand. Based on what I see of the sources, I think it stays. Axem Titanium (talk) 16:23, 3 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose The sources found convince me that this pair of characters is notable. QuicoleJR (talk) 18:04, 5 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]