Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Macduff's Son

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 on a Votes for Undeletion nomination). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was KEEP. — JIP | Talk 08:06, 2 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Macduff's Son

This page is devoted to a minor character in one of William Shakespeare's plays -- so minor that he doesn't even have a name. Brandon39 08:38, 24 September 2005 (UTC)

I don't really think the page should be deleted just because he's a minor character. He's still a character. It isn't really a stub article, either. I did write a few paragraphs.
Why delete it if it's a perfectly good article, and why delete it only to redirect it to the general Macbeth page?
Tiria 09:37, 24 September 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep, agree with Tiria; also a Shakespeare character and likely search term. Kappa 10:20, 24 September 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep. We keep individual video characters so I see no reason to delete this. The redirect only makes sense if it is also merged. Marskell 10:21, 24 September 2005 (UTC)
  • Comment that's what I meant by redirect - wasn't entierly clear Dlyons493 10:37, 24 September 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep or merge with Macduff (thane). Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 10:59, 24 September 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep, or merge into an article on Macbeth characters. Twenty years since I read this, but I remember him as the one with the immortal line "'Mother, he has killed me' (dies)" --Doc (?) 11:29, 24 September 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep. Its like how wiki policy said there could be an article for every Simpsons character. Astrokey44 11:36, 24 September 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep per above comments. (If this turns out to get a concensus to redirect it should be merged and redirected to Macduff (thane)). - Mgm|(talk) 12:21, 24 September 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep minor character in a play that has been world-famous for decades, centuries. --Mysidia (talk) 12:30, 24 September 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep - minor character but in major play by possibly the most famous playwright the world has seen. --MacRusgail 13:32, 24 September 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep. Lack of a name does not make a character insignifacant. In any case, the page is relevant and should stay per above. Karol 13:35, 24 September 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep - an awful lot more more notable than Tom Riddle. Guettarda 02:01, 25 September 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete. Err, this is Shakespeare-cruft in the same way that Tom Riddle is Harry Potter-cruft. It's a crying shame that no one came up with the idea of nominating this before all those stupid Harry Potter-stubs were established as faux-notable. /
  • Comment I agree with everyone who has said 'keep'. No offense, but I do have to wonder why it's so important that a simple page devoted to a minor character in a famous play get deleted. If that's so, then why hasn't anyone tried to do the same to some of the other minor characters in the plays whom I've seen have articles? The whole point of the Shakespearean characters category is to make articles for the characters of his plays, and that's exactly what I was doing. Tiria 07:12, 25 September 2005 (UTC)
    • My reasoning is that this is too detailed for an encyclopedia, even a Wikipedia. The reason that no one's tried to delete the other characters is probably because they haven't come across them yet. At least not the one's who want these things deleted. / Peter Isotalo 11:29, 25 September 2005 (UTC)
      • I was the one who proposed for deletion, and that was essentially my reasoning. I am a fairly new user, and perhaps I should have waited longer to see what sort of standards people apply to these things, but it did seem like a very trivial entry to me, one that I would not expect to find in an encyclopedia. It is evident from the responses that there is a strong consensus to keep this page, and I'm fine with that. For me, it's been a learning experience.Brandon39 12:54, 25 September 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep. Even though Macduff's Son remains unnamed in the play, he is not that minor; he gets murdered and is therefore part of the main plot. Sjakkalle (Check!) 08:43, 26 September 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep you fsking exclusionists. How does this hurt Wikipedia? ··gracefool |☺ 18:37, 26 September 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep, or merge with Macduff (thane). A minor character, but part of the central plot. --Meiers Twins 08:51, 29 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 an undeletion request). No further edits should be made to this page.