Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Noah Daniels
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 Redirected to Minor characters in 24. WP:POINTy AfD nomination notwithstanding, without reliable sources there is no evidence of real-world notability. Pastordavid (talk) 22:17, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Noah Daniels
This is a test case for how long an article needs to be tagged as unrefrnced before the article is deleted for not being refrenced. In this case due to the article being unrefrenced notabiliy of the aticle in the wider in-universe of the show cannot be assertained and nor can it be assertained for outside the in-universe of the show. The page contains alot of non-notable cruft such as "background information." Some of the information contained in the "background information" cannot be assertained from the show. The article also mainly reads like a polt summary which violates notability guidelines wih regards to fiction. Which states "Articles must not soley be a plot summary". I personally favour the merging of this character with the Minor characters in 24 page, but would like to go through this procedure to identify weather the problems with article means it needs deleting or weather merging is the correct form of action. Lucy-marie (talk) 12:18, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
- Keep, at least provisionally. Generally, AfD is not for "test cases". Note also that no note was left on the talk page when the article was tagged as unreferenced. Since the TV episodes are published works, and given the unusual episode "names" under the premise of 24 (TV series), it isn't even clear that the article is "unreferenced", even if it lacks reference tags. It seems to me that it's usually possible to determine which episode in the broadcast series the statements in the article are derived from. Yes, this is a primary source, but in fiction primary sources are canonical. No real opinion at present as to whether this character is major enough to warrant a standalone article, or whether the article is so fine grained that it goes over into plot summary. - Smerdis of Tlön (talk) 15:11, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
- Merge No real world notability. It belongs on this Wiki and not in an encyclopedia anyway. Gtstricky (talk) 16:12, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
- Merge or delete - Make sure when you nominate articles, you want them to be deleted, and not to make a point or any other reason. This article needs to establish notability, so to keep it, please find some creator interviews and stuff like that. Judgesurreal777 (talk) 16:33, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fictional characters-related deletions. —Quasirandom (talk) 18:00, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
- Comment No opinion one way or the other, but it seems appropriate to make mention of WP:CLEANUP, WP:PROBLEM, and as mentioned, WP:POINT. -Verdatum (talk) 18:18, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
- Procedural Keep. The article can be cleaned up, and is verifiable (in that sources exist in the form of the episodes and - possibly - interviews). There are other forums for test cases, though I acknowledge that the attempt was made in good faith. ZZ Claims ~ Evidence 21:49, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
- Delete. Chock-full of original research and plot summary; no evidence of real-world notability, and nothing useful to merge. Powers T 01:44, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
- Keep per arguments above. --T smitts (talk) 17:02, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
Comment Keep based on what arguments above?--79.74.132.117 (talk) 21:03, 9 December 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.
