Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Entharion the Wise
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 REDIRECT to Kings of Quendor. Merge from the history if desired. -Splash - tk 18:15, 10 November 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Entharion the Wise
Non-notable fictional character. Article is entirely plot summary of the character with no real-world context or significance, which fails WP:NOT#PLOT. No substantial coverage in secondary sources to indicate notability per WP:FICT. "'Entharion the Wise' -wikipedia" on Google returns 140 hits, mainly from non-reliable fansites and forums. Without reliable secondary sources independent of the subject to establish notability, it's impossible to rewrite or cleanup the article in such way that it doesn't fail WP:FICT and/or some clause of WP:NOT. Doctorfluffy 21:54, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
- Merge and Redirect to Kings of Quendor, which could easily contain more information about those kings, like Entharion, that there's more to say about than just a name. Pinball22 17:59, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
- Keep as per Meta:Wiki is not paper. Specifically, "There is no reason why there shouldn't be a page for every Simpsons character, and even a table listing every episode, all neatly cross-linked and introduced by a shorter central page. Every episode name in the list could link to a separate page for each of those episodes, with links to reviews and trivia. Each of the 100+ poker games can have its own page with rules, history, and strategy. Jimbo Wales has agreed: Hard disks are cheap." -- Masterzora 20:56, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
- Referring to an essay on Meta which has been basically unchanged in the 5 years it has existed does not somehow override the core policies of Wikipedia, including verifiablity, reliable sourcing, and notablity. In fact, the modern version of your argument is WP:PAPER, which specifically states: This policy is not a free pass for inclusion: Articles still must abide by the appropriate content policies and guidelines, in particular those covered in the five pillars. Please try to be familiar with current policies when participating in AfDs. Doctorfluffy 21:05, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fictional characters-related deletions. —Quasirandom 20:15, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
- Merge as per Pinball22. Edward321 03:17, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
- Delete as there are no sober arguements for keeping this plot summmary. Firstly this article is written from a heavy in universe perspective which is devoid of real-world context or analysis. Secondly, there are no primary sources to verify the content is not original research. Lastly, there are no reliable secondary sources to demonstrate that this fictional character has any real-world notability.--Gavin Collins 10:03, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
- Comment: That's right, we must delete this trivial article that's only useful to a few thousand people in order to save electrons. Remember, save those electrons, they're more important than you think. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 134.139.148.100 (talk) 18:14, 8 November 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.
