Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Almanzo Wilder

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The result was Nomination withdrawn (non-admin closure) — Caknuck 05:21, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Almanzo Wilder

Almanzo Wilder (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

Husband of Laura Ingalls Wilder Clarityfiend 23:04, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Withdrawing nomination. Didn't account for the books. Clarityfiend 16:52, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

• Keep. Main character subject of historical-fiction biography Farmer Boy, characters based on real-person appeared in other books/TV, and is focus of non-profit, historical society. Canuckle 23:12, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
  • This also talks about a real, non-notable person. You really want a refocus. See my response in the AfD above. Morgan Wick 23:16, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
    • Comment. No I don't want a refocus. Thanks very much for the offer. See my response above. If you have a link to a WP guideline/policy that says inspiring a character in a semi-fictional novel and being portrayed by notable actors and having a historical society dedicated to you isn't notable, that I could use. Canuckle 23:22, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
• Keep. Important person. Subject of at least one book.--Jdavid2008 02:58, 4 July 2007 (UTC) | Update: There is also a French article on him, it seems they also thought he was important enough.
• Keep Major character in the TV series---other major characters of significant TV series have their own pages, and I believe this is appropriate. Although, I'll be honest, my vote would be stronger if this was more about the character than the real person!Balloonman 03:46, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
  • Comment You do realize we're discussing real people who were portrayed in a TV series many decades after the books about them were standard fare? Just checking. The TV series doesn't seem like it should be the metric here to me. --Dhartung | Talk 04:19, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
    • Yes, I do, thus the comment that this is a rare case that I think more content on the character---I don't think the Almanzo was notable enough on his own right, but a reoccuring role in a long lasting TV series earns the entry a keep---just as it does Starbuck, Margaret Houlihan, and a number of other TV characters that was notable.Balloonman 00:22, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
  • Comment: Balloonman, the article serves as both a bio of the real-life person and an article about the character. So if you want it to be "more about the character than the real person" just add content! Canuckle 16:01, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
    • Not a subject I'm interested enough in on researching...Balloonman 05:12, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
• Keep This one of the Wilders is certainly relevant--co-main character of the entire series in the fiction. DGG 03:50, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
• Keep although we really should have a List of characters article. --Dhartung | Talk 04:19, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
• Keep It's notable enough, and I must admit I'm baffled as to how this got an AfD to begin with. -WarthogDemon 04:23, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

• Comment It's not my fault! That mean old Nellie Oleson made me do it.Clarityfiend 06:20, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

• Comment Not intending to start an arguement; purely mentioning this for the response: Nellie may have actually been nice. :P -WarthogDemon 06:33, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
• Comment: Whether she's naughty or nice, Nellie Oleson's bio needs help...although I do wish more users were bold enough to lead off a bio with "manipulative, witty, sharp-tongued..." Canuckle 00:38, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

• Keep. The historical/novel/TV thing complicates discussion, but he was the main character of one book and an important character in half the rest of the series. --Zeborah 10:01, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

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.