Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Matilda Hunter (2nd nomination)

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.

See here for the deletion review discussion. Auroranorth (!) 05:05, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

The result was Delete. The Placebo Effect (talk) 17:39, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Matilda Hunter

Matilda Hunter (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

Fictional character with no sign of real world notability Pak21 (talk) 08:39, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

• Delete as per nom. RMHED (talk) 20:32, 26 November 2007 (UTC)
• Keep major character in well-known soap opera, like articles on characters from EastEnders or Coronation Street.--UpDown (talk) 08:39, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

• Comment: Other stuff exists is not a strong argument in deletion discussions; the problem with the article is not untidyness, but the fact that it in no way demonstrates its notability via citations from reliable secondary sources. --Pak21 (talk) 08:54, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

• Keep as per UpDown. Auroranorth (!) 12:33, 27 November 2007 (UTC)
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletions. —Capitalistroadster (talk) 08:54, 27 November 2007 (UTC)
• Delete no indication that Ms Hunter herself is substantially the subject of published material. Yes she is a character in a TV show but what has been written about her ?Garrie 04:25, 30 November 2007 (UTC)
• Delete Per Garrie. Twenty Years 05:57, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
• Delete as non notable fictional character, or Merge, to Major characters from Home and Away. Drastically cut down and merge Template:Home and Away characters into the new page. --S.dedalus 23:28, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
• Redirect→Home and Away#2008 Main cast members and tag with {{R to list entry}}. I agree that this article has insufficient notability to stand on its own. --User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 11:42, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of soap opera articles nominated for deletion. --User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 11:45, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
• Keep. Notable character on well known Australian soap [1]. Well developing article, watched over by WP:SOAPS and being improved. IrishLass 15:54, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

• Comment: a plot summary is not a well developed article. A verified one with citations showing how this is notable outside the soap itself would be. --Pak21 15:58, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

• Comment to comment. The same could be said for WWE wrestlers, how are they notable outside of wrestling. I added a link to the official site showing her as a main cast member. IrishLass 16:01, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

• The fact that other articles do not have references does not mean that we should keep all articles that do not have references. --Pak21 16:09, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

• You are missing the point. You said she's not notable outside of soaps. I said the same can be said for wrestlers. That was the point. Don't make mountains out of molehills and try and start problems. Regardless, I've added sources. IrishLass 16:12, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

• Please read WP:N and WP:FICT: sources must be independent of the subject, and the official site for a soap is clearly not independent of characters in the soap. Unless sources can be found which show how Hunter is notable outside the soap, this is not a suitable article for Wikipedia. Professional wrestlers are commented on in many forums which are not directly connected with their organisation. Where are such sources for this character? --Pak21 16:18, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

• Don't play the "read this" card like I'm an idiot that's never read anything. The source is the television site, not a show site. The same sources are used for Coronation Street, East Enders, and several American soaps. If you want to count "forums", well all soaps have forums but those aren't reliable sources. So that would negate the argument on wrestlers. Many people come to Wikipedia to get information on soap characters. This is an article with a good start. It should be allowed to be developed. Let the project work on it.IrishLass 16:23, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

• See for example Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Victor_Kahu for the established precedent here; character plot summaries do not belong on Wikipedia, as is acknowledged by WP:SOAPS: "Character articles should always be written from a "real world" perspective, and should definitely not consist simply of in-universe plot summary. [...] Remember that we are here to create an encyclopedia, not to provide a comprehensive guide to soap opera storylines." --Pak21 16:40, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

• It's being worked on now. It's tagged start class and the WP:SOAPS project banner added. It deserves a chance for clean up and does meet the character criteria. The project had little to no notice about the above AfD, so I can't comment on things I didn't get a chance to assist on. Regardless, I've provided outside sources and this article is a good start to be rewritten correctly. I've stated my case, I'm done arguing with the likes of people like you who just won't ever understand. IrishLass 16:53, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

• Additional comment - after looking around, this show is shown in not only Australia but also in the UK. The WP:SOAPS project is relatively new and should be allowed to develop this character as there is information out there outside of just the one official television station page. IrishLass 16:38, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

• Keep I agree with 'IrishLass', it is capable of being improved, and I dont agree with deleting articles if they have potential. There is a big effort by a small number of soap editors (like IrishLass and me) who are trying to cleanup soap character articles to make them comply with policy, but it's a huge job and more soap editors need to start helping out if they want these character pages to be kept. At the moment this is just unsourced plot summary, so in order to keep it, independent sources discussing the character and her storylines need to be found. But that shouldn't be too difficult. Soap characters and their actors are often featured in the press. If a storyline is controversial or has a big impact, then it's often reported on by the media. Info on casting, critical commentary, reception, criticism, popularity, popular culture, ratings, character development (from the view of writers, producers and the actor) are all things that could be included to make this comply with policy. I don't watch this soap so I would not be the best person to do the editing, but if any home and away editors are interested in keeping this page, then they need to start searching for sources. Try Australian newspapers, news archives, magazines etc.Gungadin♦ 16:58, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
• Keep A main character on a programme that is top-rated in Australia, Ireland, and the UK. A person with a stack of magazines about soaps would be able to source this. I remember reading an interview with the actress where she spoke about the character. AfD is about an article's potential, and looking at the excellent work that editors have done on other fictional soap opera characters like this and this, I'm sure the same can be done here. Bláthnaid 23:49, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

Thinking back, I think the interview was in a teen magazine where the actress Indiana Evans talked about how her character changed over the years, and there was a "how to dress like Mattie" spread also. That was last year I think, I'm afraid I can't remember the name of the magazine, it was just something I was flicking through. Bláthnaid 23:56, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

• Delete or merge. This WikiProject must get WP:RS or face mass deletions. Sorry. 17:10, 5 December 2007 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bearian (talk • contribs)

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.