Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Victoire Weasley

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 merge to Minor Harry Potter characters. Daniel Case 13:39, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Victoire Weasley

Victoire Weasley (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

Non-notable Harry Potter character. The only reference to Victoire in the books is in the epilogue and is extremely brief. Most of the article is OR and given the little context in the book, even the title is OR because the surname isn't even mentioned in the book (well, I just re-read the epilogue and I don't see any mention of it. PageantUpdater • talk • contribs • 09:04, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

  • Remus's only son sgould get his own page.
  • Comment,Yeah, but Teddy Lupin seems to be romantically involed with her, therefore she should be kept. It shows a sense of continuation with the story and she has to be a Weasley, because she is refered to as "our Victorie" and has a French name, obviously from Fluer's French inheritance. The Neverdoll 10:16, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
  • Merge to The Weasley Family. We dont know anything significant about her (or for that matter Teddy) to devote an entire article. If Jo decides to write more in the future in which we learn more about her, we can always revive the article. For now, having this as a redirect is enough. --Ayleuss 10:27, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
  • Merge Only a couple of lines of text about the character, most of the material in the article is filler Recurring dreams 11:40, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
  • Merge A character with no plot relevance mentioned in passing doesn't need her own article; the information in this article is all conjecture or information that can be found in one of the main articles.--stufff 14:10, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
  • Merge per above Will (talk) 14:20, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
  • Merge A character that's barely a character hardly deserves its own article. Roundelais 14:55, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
  • Merge with Weasley family. T Rex | talk 15:05, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
  • Merge with Weasley family - I agree.DiScOrD tHe LuNaTiC 15:29, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete No proof she is a Weasley beyond OR. Zazaban 18:16, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
  • Merge per most of the above. ɑʀкʏɑɴ 18:19, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete The character gets only a passing mention in the epilogue of one book, and most of what is "known" about her is based on speculation and presumption. --Dajagr 18:35, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
    I would argue specifically against merging with the Weasley family article, because, although the book makes it very likely that the character is related in that way, it is not explicit and thus OR/speculation. If the article ends up being merged rather than deleted (which latter I still recommend, because of the non-notability of the subject), I would strongly recommend merging to Minor Harry Potter characters in accordance with Quackdave, below. --Dajagr 23:44, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
  • Merge with Weasley family Neville Longbottom 20:07, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
  • Merge or delete. This isn't even a character - it's a name and a lot of speculation. Natalie 20:30, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
  • Merge. We don't even know that she is Bill and Fleur's daughter! Valley2city 22:10, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
  • Merge. Maybe even to Minor Harry Potter characters rather than Weasley family, since an interesting point is raised by nominator and Zazaban - namely that "cousin" doesn't necessarily mean "first cousin". For all we can verify, she could be Dudley's daughter, and thereby James Potter's second cousin. Yes, I know it's unlikely, but encyclopedic content needs to be more than just "safe to assume". Quackdave 22:25, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
  • Merge with the Weasleys per most of the above--JForget 23:14, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
  • Merge to Minor Harry Potter characters, since the surname and exact relation is speculative (it seems the most likely alternative, but it's not explicitly stated). —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 01:57, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
  • Merge to Minor Harry Potter characters; even the title of this article is speculative. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 02:43, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete. No direct evidence that this is correct name of character. Merge content to Minor Harry Potter characters, per my comment on Gellert Grindelwald. This is just getting ridiculous. Espresso Addict 03:15, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
  • Merge to Weasley family. It's not that hard. --Fbv65edel / ☑t / ☛c || 03:37, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
  • Merge This is silly - she is mentioned once and all we know is she snogged Teddy. We dont even know which Weasley's daughter she is although we can guess. Editor guesses do not belong in articles. Dolores Umbridge 10:14, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
Good point, Professor Umbridge, but your username scares me a bit... :) Valley2city 16:25, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
And so it should ;o) Dolores Umbridge 20:28, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
  • Merge with Minor Harry Potter characters (as others have said, there seem to be no canon sources unequivocally backing up a relationship with Wasleys). -- pne (talk) 19:00, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
  • Merge to Weasley family. But while we're talking, I suggest patience to everyone who's exasperated at recent Potter material. Harry Potter articles are in a completely unavoidable state of frenzy - just give them a bit of time, and things will calm down. --Kizor 21:28, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
  • Merge to the Weasley family, as suggested above: not to Minor characters, because there's a Weasley family article, and because she has to be a Weasley — otherwise a connexion with Teddy wouldn't be able to make him really family, as noted in the epilogue. Nyttend 21:29, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
  • (*slaps own forehead for not realizing it*) Nyttend has spotted the obvious, which is often a very challenging task. It's explicit in the books that marrying Victoire would be marrying into the Weasleys. That settles that, I believe. --Kizor 11:30, 25 July 2007 (UTC)
  • Not quite. It's explicit that he would be marrying into Lily Potter's family, since she is the one who makes that comment. Which is no more than we knew already. Quackdave 17:53, 25 July 2007 (UTC)
  • Hmm. We do know that Ted would have to marry into either the Weasley family line and the Potter family line, and that Harry is the sole surviving member of the Potter line. I checked the text, and found a point that apparently hasn't been brought up: James calls Victoria his cousin, and Harry was an only child. --Kizor 18:52, 25 July 2007 (UTC)
  • Merge to Weasley family. She is completely unworthy of an article. Titanium Dragon 23:00, 25 July 2007 (UTC)
  • Merge to Minor Harry Potter characters Lemonflashtalk 00:44, 26 July 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete She is not even a character, but gets a passing mention. I have not read the book yet, but am strongly persuaded by Dajagr's arguments. There is no place on wikipedia for original research. However, if kept, the name should be Victoire (Harry Potter character), and any juxtaposition of "Victoire" and "Weasley" should be expunged until sources exist to corroborate. Ohconfucius 04:03, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

Keep this page Please

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.