| Revision as of 00:30, 15 August 2022 editJclemens (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers45,446 edits →Willoughby Kipling: k← Previous edit | Revision as of 00:51, 15 August 2022 edit undoTTN (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users58,138 editsNo edit summaryNext edit → | ||
| Line 8: | Line 8: | ||
| *<small class="delsort-notice">Note: This discussion has been included in the ] lists for the following topics: ], ], and ]. ] (]) 00:05, 15 August 2022 (UTC)</small> | *<small class="delsort-notice">Note: This discussion has been included in the ] lists for the following topics: ], ], and ]. ] (]) 00:05, 15 August 2022 (UTC)</small> | ||
| *'''Keep''' What the nom terms "pop culture fluff articles" are in fact non-trivial independent reliable sources like , , , and . ] (]) 00:30, 15 August 2022 (UTC) | *'''Keep''' What the nom terms "pop culture fluff articles" are in fact non-trivial independent reliable sources like , , , and . ] (]) 00:30, 15 August 2022 (UTC) | ||
| :Yes, minor fluff that brings absolutely nothing to the table | |||
| ::: Literally nothing but an overview of the character for the uninitiated, covering what already exists in the article. No usable commentary on the character. | |||
| ::: Another minor introductory overview with basically nothing usable. | |||
| ::: Same as the above | |||
| ::: Same as the above | |||
| ::All of them are basically useless in both producing content for the article and fulfilling GNG. It confirms the character does in fact exist in the show and gives an extraordinarily minor development tidbit that is already covered from primary sources. ] (]) 00:51, 15 August 2022 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 00:51, 15 August 2022
Willoughby Kipling
New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
- How to contribute
- Introduction to deletion process
- Guide to deletion (glossary)
- Help, my article got nominated for deletion!
- Willoughby Kipling (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Topic fails WP:GNG. Mentions in reliable sources appear to be limited to trivial mentions and pop culture fluff articles. TTN (talk) 00:05, 15 August 2022 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Fictional elements, Science fiction and fantasy, and Comics and animation. TTN (talk) 00:05, 15 August 2022 (UTC)
- Keep What the nom terms "pop culture fluff articles" are in fact non-trivial independent reliable sources like ScreenRant, Decider, CBR, and Cinemablend. Jclemens (talk) 00:30, 15 August 2022 (UTC)
- Yes, minor fluff that brings absolutely nothing to the table
- ScreenRant: Literally nothing but an overview of the character for the uninitiated, covering what already exists in the article. No usable commentary on the character.
- Decider: Another minor introductory overview with basically nothing usable.
- CBR: Same as the above
- Cinemablend: Same as the above
- All of them are basically useless in both producing content for the article and fulfilling GNG. It confirms the character does in fact exist in the show and gives an extraordinarily minor development tidbit that is already covered from primary sources. TTN (talk) 00:51, 15 August 2022 (UTC)