| Revision as of 13:06, 14 July 2009 editEdward321 (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users36,434 edits →India Napier← Previous edit | Revision as of 00:37, 17 July 2009 edit undoDGG (talk | contribs)316,874 edits →India NapierNext edit → | ||
| Line 15: | Line 15: | ||
| *'''Delete'''. Another minor, unreferenced character. –] 03:35, 14 July 2009 (UTC) | *'''Delete'''. Another minor, unreferenced character. –] 03:35, 14 July 2009 (UTC) | ||
| *'''Merge''' to the appropraite character list. ] (]) 13:06, 14 July 2009 (UTC) | *'''Merge''' to the appropraite character list. ] (]) 13:06, 14 July 2009 (UTC) | ||
| *'''Keep''' or merge. If we go by the GNG, the presence of the articles that Matthew found are reason for a separate article, discussing not just the character but the attention paid to it--which is the oft-request RW information. Personally, I think it's better merged, as for all such characters. ''']''' (]) 00:37, 17 July 2009 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 00:37, 17 July 2009
India Napier
- India Napier (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)
might as well toss a few more on the barbie; non-notable fictional character with all the usual fancruft issues. a fictional baby born 3 weeks ago. delete. Jack Merridew 10:32, 12 July 2009 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. -- Jack Merridew 10:32, 12 July 2009 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. -- Jack Merridew 10:33, 12 July 2009 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. -- Jack Merridew 10:33, 12 July 2009 (UTC)
- Character has already received some coverage: , , , , (from - now deleted) As well as two articles in this week's newspapers:
- Bryan Patterson: "Close Up: Elouise Mignon", page 9, 12 July 2009. TV Guide supplement. The Sunday Telegraph.
- "What's On", page 7, 9 July, 2009. TV+ Supplement The Cairns Post.
Is it enough to warrant its own article? Maybe, but its probably more beneficial to Merge with List of Neighbours characters. Matthewedwards : Chat 18:23, 12 July 2009 (UTC)
- Delete or Merge with List of Neighbours characters. Poltair (talk) 22:18, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
- Delete. Another minor, unreferenced character. –Moondyne 03:35, 14 July 2009 (UTC)
- Merge to the appropraite character list. Edward321 (talk) 13:06, 14 July 2009 (UTC)
- Keep or merge. If we go by the GNG, the presence of the articles that Matthew found are reason for a separate article, discussing not just the character but the attention paid to it--which is the oft-request RW information. Personally, I think it's better merged, as for all such characters. DGG (talk) 00:37, 17 July 2009 (UTC)