Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Nucky Thompson: Difference between revisions

< Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion Browse history interactively ← Previous editContent deleted Content addedVisual WikitextInline

Revision as of 22:13, 26 November 2024 editJclemens (talk \| contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers45,438 edits →Nucky Thompson: k← Previous edit		Latest revision as of 09:07, 30 November 2024 edit undoLiz (talk \| contribs)Autopatrolled, Checkusers, Oversighters, Administrators760,035 edits →Nucky Thompson: Closed as keep (XFDcloser)
Line 1:		Line 1:
			<div class="boilerplate afd vfd xfd-closed archived mw-archivedtalk" style="background-color: var(--background-color-progressive-subtle, #F3F9FF); color: var(--color-base, inherit); margin: 2em 0 0 0; padding: 0 10px 0 10px; border: 1px solid var(--border-color-subtle, #AAAAAA);">
⚫	===]===
			:''The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. <span style="color:var(--color-error, red);">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's ] or in a ]). No further edits should be made to this page.''
	{{REMOVE THIS TEMPLATE WHEN CLOSING THIS AfD\|F}}
			<!--Template:Afd top

			Note: If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to re-nominate an article for deletion, you must manually edit the AfD nomination links to create a new discussion page using the name format of ]. When you create the new discussion page, please provide a link to this old discussion in your nomination. -->

			The result was '''keep'''‎__EXPECTED_UNCONNECTED_PAGE__. Seems like a consensus for a procedural close. This happens a lot with bundled nominations. <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 09:07, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
		⚫	===]===
	<noinclude>{{AFD help}}</noinclude>		<noinclude>{{AFD help}}</noinclude>
	:{{la\|1=Nucky Thompson}} – (<includeonly>]</includeonly><noinclude>]</noinclude> \| ])		:{{la\|1=Nucky Thompson}} – (<includeonly>]</includeonly><noinclude>]</noinclude> \| ])
Line 19:		Line 24:
	*'''Procedural Close''' per Rorshacma. Even if it achieves the same outcome, this process is all wrong for this many different articles. I see enough early evidence that each article is a little different. By going one-at-a-time, we have a better chance of getting it right. ] (]) 03:44, 25 November 2024 (UTC)		*'''Procedural Close''' per Rorshacma. Even if it achieves the same outcome, this process is all wrong for this many different articles. I see enough early evidence that each article is a little different. By going one-at-a-time, we have a better chance of getting it right. ] (]) 03:44, 25 November 2024 (UTC)
	*'''Keep''' There's absolutely no reason for this to be here. Each of these can be merged into ] without needing to be here, and, in the process, any excess detail can be trimmed. Nothing about the nomination suggests that the delete button is helpful here--or, really, that it would even be policy based to delete any of this: If the characters of a notable franchise aren't themselves notable, merge them to a list of characters per ] point 2. You can't delete the redirects, because that would violate attribution per ]. Let's save AfD for things that might actually be deletable under at least some policy-based theory, please. ] (]) 22:13, 26 November 2024 (UTC)		*'''Keep''' There's absolutely no reason for this to be here. Each of these can be merged into ] without needing to be here, and, in the process, any excess detail can be trimmed. Nothing about the nomination suggests that the delete button is helpful here--or, really, that it would even be policy based to delete any of this: If the characters of a notable franchise aren't themselves notable, merge them to a list of characters per ] point 2. You can't delete the redirects, because that would violate attribution per ]. Let's save AfD for things that might actually be deletable under at least some policy-based theory, please. ] (]) 22:13, 26 November 2024 (UTC)
			{{clear}}
			:''The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. <b style="color:red">Please do not modify it.</b> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's ] or in a ]). No further edits should be made to this page.''<!--Template:Afd bottom--></div>

Latest revision as of 09:07, 30 November 2024

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 keep‎. Seems like a consensus for a procedural close. This happens a lot with bundled nominations. Liz 09:07, 30 November 2024 (UTC)

Nucky Thompson

New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Unfortunately, as much as i love Boardwalk Empire, Nucky doesn't passes WP:GNG, all the sources are passing mentions of the show and some don't even talk about him. My WP:BEFORE didn't help either. I am also nominating the following related pages because of similar reasons.:

Procedural close. I am finding WP:SIGCOV on several of these characters. It is going to be a headache to talk about them as a group. No prejudice in the nominator bringing them forward individually, but I strongly oppose a bundled nomination.4meter4 (talk) 04:35, 24 November 2024 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Fictional elements and Television. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 07:40, 24 November 2024 (UTC)
Procedural Close - A cursory search is showing a pretty large difference in potential notability for the different characters in this bundle, making it impossible to avoid a WP:TRAINWRECK. As stated by 4meter4 already, there should be no prejudice against subsequently nominating some of them individually, but the discussion for all of them as a bundled nomination is not going to work. Rorshacma (talk) 00:57, 25 November 2024 (UTC)
Procedural Close per Rorshacma. Even if it achieves the same outcome, this process is all wrong for this many different articles. I see enough early evidence that each article is a little different. By going one-at-a-time, we have a better chance of getting it right. Shooterwalker (talk) 03:44, 25 November 2024 (UTC)
Keep There's absolutely no reason for this to be here. Each of these can be merged into List of Boardwalk Empire characters without needing to be here, and, in the process, any excess detail can be trimmed. Nothing about the nomination suggests that the delete button is helpful here--or, really, that it would even be policy based to delete any of this: If the characters of a notable franchise aren't themselves notable, merge them to a list of characters per WP:CSC point 2. You can't delete the redirects, because that would violate attribution per WP:CWW. Let's save AfD for things that might actually be deletable under at least some policy-based theory, please. Jclemens (talk) 22:13, 26 November 2024 (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.