Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ric Dalby (second 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.

The result was Delete. WP:V is policy, so a lack of sources--after a thorough search--is ultimately a reason to delete. — Scientizzle 17:55, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Ric Dalby

Ric Dalby (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

Fictional character showing no sign of real world notability Pak21 (talk) 11:59, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

• Delete - no reliable sources attest to any real-world notability or significance to the character. Article is pretty much just a rehash of the WP:PLOT involving the character. Otto4711 (talk) 17:51, 25 November 2007 (UTC)
• Keep - major character in well known soap opera, like any main character from EastEnders for Coronation Street. The page needs tidying etc, but that is no reason to delete.--UpDown (talk) 08:32, 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) 09:00, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

• Delete no sources. AnteaterZot 23:59, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

No sources is not a reason to delete, its a reason to find sources.--UpDown 08:26, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

So get going. As WP:V says, "The burden of evidence lies with the editor who adds or restores material. [...] If no reliable, third-party sources can be found for an article topic, Wikipedia should not have an article on it." --Pak21 08:38, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

• Delete - Recreated against previous consensus, in which case there should indeed be sources already present or any other strong case per WP:FICTION that I do not see here.--Tikiwont 10:22, 4 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.