Misplaced Pages

Latest revision as of 12:21, 26 May 2022

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 List of Neighbours characters. Note that this decision is non-binding, so discussion can continue on the article's talk page. –Juliancolton |  16:03, 26 July 2009 (UTC)

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. Matthew has it right: meeting the GNG does not compel an article--and inversely, not meeting it does not prevent one. DGG (talk) 00:37, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, –Juliancolton |  13:40, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

• Merge to List of Neighbours characters. I could not find sources establishing notability. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 00:24, 20 July 2009 (UTC)
• Merge to List of Neighbours characters.--DizFreak 10:29, 20 July 2009 (UTC)
• delete and redirect if needed. Articles listed above are trivial mentions at best. Savidan 18:01, 20 July 2009 (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.