Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Principal Snyder: Difference between revisions

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

Revision as of 11:03, 17 December 2024 editDaranios (talk \| contribs)Extended confirmed users8,951 edits Keep← Previous edit		Revision as of 01:26, 19 December 2024 edit undoPiotrus (talk \| contribs)Autopatrolled, Event coordinators, Extended confirmed users, File movers, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers285,791 editsNo edit summaryTag: 2017 wikitext editor Next edit →
Line 17:		Line 17:
	:Note that the nominator has {{oldid2\|1262720520\|left}} the project after being counseled to learn how AfD works and admitting they never did a BEFORE. Right now, there's a lot of people looking at the article and saying "I don't see sources in the article, redirect it" and others saying "Sources are easy to find, I see them." Both of which are fine opinions, but the latter are less policy based, per ] and ]--NOT#PLOT doesn't apply to an improved version of the article, and so is not a reason for deletion. ] (]) 10:03, 17 December 2024 (UTC)		:Note that the nominator has {{oldid2\|1262720520\|left}} the project after being counseled to learn how AfD works and admitting they never did a BEFORE. Right now, there's a lot of people looking at the article and saying "I don't see sources in the article, redirect it" and others saying "Sources are easy to find, I see them." Both of which are fine opinions, but the latter are less policy based, per ] and ]--NOT#PLOT doesn't apply to an improved version of the article, and so is not a reason for deletion. ] (]) 10:03, 17 December 2024 (UTC)
	*'''Keep''' I think secondary sources like "" and "", while remaining close to the plot, have enough characterization and commentary of what the character represents in the series to fullfill the requirements of both ] and ]. The nomination reads a lot like it was considering only the current state of the article, which is ]. At least, as {{u\|Jclemens}} already said, there is no ] articluated. ] (]) 11:03, 17 December 2024 (UTC)		*'''Keep''' I think secondary sources like "" and "", while remaining close to the plot, have enough characterization and commentary of what the character represents in the series to fullfill the requirements of both ] and ]. The nomination reads a lot like it was considering only the current state of the article, which is ]. At least, as {{u\|Jclemens}} already said, there is no ] articluated. ] (]) 11:03, 17 December 2024 (UTC)
			*'''Redirect''' with no prejudice to revising my opinion if someone tries to improves this based on sources Daranios found or others, and pings me. Currently, however this fails ], ] and like. Pure ]. --<sub style="border:1px solid #228B22;padding:1px;">]\|]</sub> 01:26, 19 December 2024 (UTC)

Revision as of 01:26, 19 December 2024

Principal Snyder

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

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

This Buffy character doesn't meet WP:FICTION or WP:GNG, there is no SIGCOV of him. Everything about the character is all in universe information, to make it worse, it only sites one unreliable source. Merge or Redirect to List of Buffy the Vampire Slayer characters. Toby2023 (talk) 03:08, 9 December 2024 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Fictional elements and Television. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:13, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
Keep BEFORE not articulated, please search Google Scholar with the additional keyword Slayage. I see plenty peer reviewed independent RS on a cursory search which can be used to improve the article. Jclemens (talk) 06:42, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
Redirect (or merge) to LoC. Fails WP:NOT#PLOT and is just a supporting character. – sgeureka 12:58, 11 December 2024 (UTC)
A supporting character does not mean that they are not notable. There are some supporting characters with GAs DaniloDaysOfOurLives (talk) 17:26, 11 December 2024 (UTC)
Redirect for failing WP:NOT#PLOT and WP:SIGCOV. Jontesta (talk) 14:26, 11 December 2024 (UTC)
Did you do a search, or are you basing things on the current state of the article? Because if you did a search and found nothing, I'd like to help you improve your skills. Jclemens (talk) 16:27, 11 December 2024 (UTC)
Keep - I agree that BEFORE was not articulated - I have checked online and also have seen SIGCOV that Jclemens has included.DaniloDaysOfOurLives (talk) 15:32, 11 December 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 03:41, 16 December 2024 (UTC)

Redirect or merge, per Sgeureka. What few sources provide only trivial mentions or WP:PLOT, and this doesn't pass WP:GNG. Shooterwalker (talk) 19:31, 16 December 2024 (UTC)

Note that the nominator has left the project after being counseled to learn how AfD works and admitting they never did a BEFORE. Right now, there's a lot of people looking at the article and saying "I don't see sources in the article, redirect it" and others saying "Sources are easy to find, I see them." Both of which are fine opinions, but the latter are less policy based, per WP:NEXIST and WP:SURMOUNTABLE--NOT#PLOT doesn't apply to an improved version of the article, and so is not a reason for deletion. Jclemens (talk) 10:03, 17 December 2024 (UTC)

Keep I think secondary sources like "Buffy, the Scooby Gang, and Monstrous Authority: BtVS and the Subversion of Authority" and ""You're on My Campus, Buddy!" Sovereign and Disciplinary Power at Sunnydale High", while remaining close to the plot, have enough characterization and commentary of what the character represents in the series to fullfill the requirements of both WP:WHYN and WP:NOTPLOT. The nomination reads a lot like it was considering only the current state of the article, which is not decisive for the question of deletion. At least, as Jclemens already said, there is no WP:BEFORE articluated. Daranios (talk) 11:03, 17 December 2024 (UTC)
Redirect with no prejudice to revising my opinion if someone tries to improves this based on sources Daranios found or others, and pings me. Currently, however this fails WP:GNG, WP:V and like. Pure WP:FANCRUFT. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 01:26, 19 December 2024 (UTC)

Categories:

Revision as of 11:03, 17 December 2024 editDaranios (talk \| contribs)Extended confirmed users8,951 edits Keep← Previous edit		Revision as of 01:26, 19 December 2024 edit undoPiotrus (talk \| contribs)Autopatrolled, Event coordinators, Extended confirmed users, File movers, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers285,791 editsNo edit summaryTag: 2017 wikitext editor Next edit →
Line 17:		Line 17:
	:Note that the nominator has {{oldid2\|1262720520\|left}} the project after being counseled to learn how AfD works and admitting they never did a BEFORE. Right now, there's a lot of people looking at the article and saying "I don't see sources in the article, redirect it" and others saying "Sources are easy to find, I see them." Both of which are fine opinions, but the latter are less policy based, per ] and ]--NOT#PLOT doesn't apply to an improved version of the article, and so is not a reason for deletion. ] (]) 10:03, 17 December 2024 (UTC)		:Note that the nominator has {{oldid2\|1262720520\|left}} the project after being counseled to learn how AfD works and admitting they never did a BEFORE. Right now, there's a lot of people looking at the article and saying "I don't see sources in the article, redirect it" and others saying "Sources are easy to find, I see them." Both of which are fine opinions, but the latter are less policy based, per ] and ]--NOT#PLOT doesn't apply to an improved version of the article, and so is not a reason for deletion. ] (]) 10:03, 17 December 2024 (UTC)
	*'''Keep''' I think secondary sources like "" and "", while remaining close to the plot, have enough characterization and commentary of what the character represents in the series to fullfill the requirements of both ] and ]. The nomination reads a lot like it was considering only the current state of the article, which is ]. At least, as {{u\|Jclemens}} already said, there is no ] articluated. ] (]) 11:03, 17 December 2024 (UTC)		*'''Keep''' I think secondary sources like "" and "", while remaining close to the plot, have enough characterization and commentary of what the character represents in the series to fullfill the requirements of both ] and ]. The nomination reads a lot like it was considering only the current state of the article, which is ]. At least, as {{u\|Jclemens}} already said, there is no ] articluated. ] (]) 11:03, 17 December 2024 (UTC)
			*'''Redirect''' with no prejudice to revising my opinion if someone tries to improves this based on sources Daranios found or others, and pings me. Currently, however this fails ], ] and like. Pure ]. --<sub style="border:1px solid #228B22;padding:1px;">]\|]</sub> 01:26, 19 December 2024 (UTC)