Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Digeri Dingo

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 redirect to Taz-Mania. (non-admin closure) Aervanath lives in the Orphanage 17:11, 7 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Digeri Dingo

This character does not establish notability independent of its series. Without coverage in reliable third party sources, it is just made up of unnecessary plot summary and original research. TTN (talk) 22:14, 2 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, as characters appearing in only a single work of fiction fail WP:FICT unless there is significant coverage of the character in reliable secondary sources. Since this article cites no sources, notability and verifiability cannot be established. It is merely an expanded plot summary and thus fails WP:NOT#PLOT, as the plots are already summarized in the main articles on the works of fiction. I do not think it likely that secondary sources exist which would establish this character's independent notability, so I support deletion. --IllaZilla (talk) 22:58, 2 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fictional characters-related deletion discussions. -- Fabrictramp | talk to me 22:03, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. -- Fabrictramp | talk to me 22:03, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Merge/redirect to Taz-Mania. Notability isn't claimed for this character, but the search term is valid, so redirect.--Fabrictramp | talk to me 22:05, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. It's notability depends on the cartoon show exclusively. -- Magioladitis (talk) 01:18, 6 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Merge/redirect although the criteria as given by Illazilla is not policy. V does not depend on secondary sources. Quite the opposite, with most fiction content. Butthere is no argument being given against a merge. DGG (talk) 02:35, 6 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Actually, WP:V does in fact explicitly call for secondary sources: "If no reliable, third-party sources can be found for an article topic, Wikipedia should not have an article on it." The claim that this is not the case for most fiction content is, I think, fallacious, as WP:WAF and WP:FICT both reflect a community consensus that secondary sources are required for all article topics, even articles on works or elements of fiction. In fact the majority of deletion/merge discussion in the area of fiction hinge on precisely this criteria. --IllaZilla (talk) 03:20, 6 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as the entire article fails WP:V, but redirect to Taz-Mania. Stifle (talk) 08:38, 7 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete after merging any relevant bits into Taz-Mania as this fails WP:FICT. I don't think a redirect is necessary here as this character isn't really that notable and the main article would probably show up at the top of any search results on this site. Bettia (rawr CRUSH!) 11:48, 7 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep due to disruptive copy and paste noms across multiple AfDs that only merit copy and paste replies and notability.--63.3.1.130 (talk) 15:15, 7 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

delete as non-notable outside fictional universe. Redirect if covered in Taz-Mania.Yobmod (talk) 15:20, 7 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

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.