Talk:Randy (Trailer Park Boys character)

Deletion?
Hi! I notice that this article has been "recreated", even though the deletion process consensus determined that it should be redirected. Why is that? -- SatyrTN (talk | contribs) 10:13, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
 * I recreated the article, because I don't think a consesus was really reached. There was not enough input in the discussion. Now, I've had no part in creating the article or working on the article, but I think it's ridiculous to merge this. Considering how many articles Wikipedia has on major characters on television shows, it would be POV to merge a major character on a popular Canadian TV show. -- Earl Andrew - talk 18:02, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
 * If that's your only article, please read WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. If you'd like, I'll re-list this for AFD so a more general consensus can be reached.
 * BTW, my reason for putting this up for AfD has nothing to do with it being a Canadian show. I'd do the same thing for an American, Thai, Columbian, or Nigerian show.  Randy may be a major character on the show, but there are no references in the article, he's made no contribution to society in general, and generally fails WP:FICT. But that's just my opinion - we'll put him up for AfD again and see how it goes. -- SatyrTN (talk | contribs)  21:18, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Not having sources is not a reason for deletion. WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS may be relevant for most things, but I think it is valid here because it articles on major characters of popular television shows is entrenched in the project. -- Earl Andrew - talk 01:51, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
 * I hate to say it, but you're wrong. WP:FICT says that major characters are covered in the article on that work - in this case, Trailer Park Boys.  Only when an "encyclopedic treatment" of a character has caused the section to be too long should it get an article of its' own.  You might want to read "Writing About Fiction" and "Notability (fiction)". -- SatyrTN (talk | contribs)  05:36, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
 * It would be too long if we incorporated the body of the article into the actual article. -- Earl Andrew - talk 05:47, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
 * I agree with Earl on this. There was clearly no consensus to remove the content, and replacing the article with a link to a two sentence summary clearly does that. - SimonP 15:39, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Yup. There was no consensus on the deletion. I smell foul play, personally. Perhaps we can go through this again? I don't really want to go through deletion review, since it's foreign territory for me. -- Earl Andrew - talk 09:02, 24 July 2007 (UTC)