Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Charles Ingalls

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

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The result was Nomination withdrawn (non-admin closure) — Caknuck 05:19, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Charles Ingalls

Charles Ingalls (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

Notable only for being the father of Laura Ingalls Wilder. Clarityfiend 22:45, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Comment I withdraw the nomination (same reason as given for Caroline Ingalls above). Clarityfiend 06:31, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep. Portrayed a number of times by notable actors. Arguably the most well-known settler to the general public due to success of daughter's book. Canuckle 23:07, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
  • 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 03:50, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
  • Merge and redirect to Laura Ingalls Wilder or to Little House on the Prairie or Delete. Per Wikipedia:Notability (fiction) Major characters and major treatments of such matters as places and concepts in a work of fiction are covered in the article on that work.. While not a fictional character, the television program is a work of fiction. Jeepday (talk) 03:57, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
    • Don't forget the second half of Wikipedia:Notability (fiction) : If an encyclopedic treatment of a character causes the article on the work itself to become long, that character is given a main article. The question then becomes who are the major characters. That combined with the real life individuals piece IMHO warrants articles for the more major characters.Balloonman 00:30, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
You are correct Balloonman, 'If an encyclopedic treatment of a character, etc In this case it does not. The current article has about 1 paragraph worth of "treatment" on the character separate from what should be covered in the main article. Jeepday (talk) 13:38, 5 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.