Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Chicken Lady
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 of the debate was no consensus between the options of "keep" and "merge"; reverts to "keep". --Angr/tɔk tə mi 17:22, 28 September 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Chicken Lady
Wikipedia does not need an article on each separate Kids in the Hall sketch. — ciphergoth 22:53, 19 September 2005 (UTC)
- Keep, recurring character. Kappa 23:50, 19 September 2005 (UTC)
- Merge into Kids in the Hall, which is still plenty short to address recurring characters and well-known skits itself. — mendel ☎ 00:44, 20 September 2005 (UTC)
- Sketch character no less notable than any other character filed in Category:Fictional comedy characters. We're playing the "different rules for Canadians" game again, I see. Either keep or delete all fictional comedy characters. Bearcat 01:25, 20 September 2005 (UTC)
- As a data point, I'd vote "Merge into the show page, unless it's long enough to need splitting out" for everyone in that category except Bob and Doug McKenzie, and that because those hosers transcended SCTV to become entrenched in the Canadian psyche. — mendel ☎ 01:35, 20 September 2005 (UTC)
- Would you say "Either keep or delete all real people"? — ciphergoth 07:37, 20 September 2005 (UTC)
- Unless you're actually attempting to suggest that Chicken Lady is somehow inherently less notable than Roseanne Roseannadanna, this is a false comparison as "all real people" are not necessarily of equal notability to each other within a specifically-defined category. Bearcat 17:11, 20 September 2005 (UTC)
- I agree that the article you cite is no more notable - maybe you should list it in AfD? I don't understand the second part of your argument. Like real people, fictional people vary in notability. Some real people and some fictional people have articles who probably shouldn't. I see no reason why Wikipedia should have treat the notability of the fictional very differently from that of the real. — ciphergoth 15:30, 25 September 2005 (UTC)
- The point is that there is no article in Category:Fictional comedy characters that can be legitimately said to be on a different side of the "keep vs. delete" line than Chicken Lady is. Bearcat 22:07, 26 September 2005 (UTC)
- I agree that the article you cite is no more notable - maybe you should list it in AfD? I don't understand the second part of your argument. Like real people, fictional people vary in notability. Some real people and some fictional people have articles who probably shouldn't. I see no reason why Wikipedia should have treat the notability of the fictional very differently from that of the real. — ciphergoth 15:30, 25 September 2005 (UTC)
- Unless you're actually attempting to suggest that Chicken Lady is somehow inherently less notable than Roseanne Roseannadanna, this is a false comparison as "all real people" are not necessarily of equal notability to each other within a specifically-defined category. Bearcat 17:11, 20 September 2005 (UTC)
- Keep Recurring character from a major television show. Paul 00:04, 21 September 2005 (UTC)
- Merge. Chicken lady et. al have no notability outside of KitH. The fact that other Wikipedians made poor choices for article inclusion does not obligate us to do the same. -- Corvus 18:25, 23 September 2005 (UTC)
- Merge into KitH. Microtonal...(Put your head on my shoulder) 04:31, 25 September 2005 (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.
