Talk:Water Lily (Wild Cards)

Speedy Deletion
I've placed a hangon tag on the article, requesting that it not be deleted. Personally, I think we should merge all the short articles about Wild Cards characters into List of Wild Cards characters and make those articles into redirects, as now recommended at Notability (fiction). The problem here is that, as I understand things, the GFDL requires us to make the article into a redirect, as opposed to deleting it and creating a redirect. (I agree that we should not have an article here, but I say we should have a redirect.)

Could we please have some time to discuss this? I don't think the Wild Cards articles are high on anybody's priority list (certainly not on mine!), so it will take weeks or even months to check for consensus about the merge and then (I hope) do the merge. Cheers, CWC 11:52, 14 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Agreed. I find this and other WC profiles to be nicely written and certainly worth keeping in some way.  This one specifically does have room for some improvement - for one thing, it could well make some mention of what happened to her after the second infection. Luis Dantas 06:02, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

As she was a viewpoint character in three books of the series, I don't really think she qualifies as "non-notable". She's near the center of several plot arcs; her recruitment into and recue from the Masons, as well as her involvement in the Astronomer's revenge plot and her discovery of Hiram Wrchester's involvment with Ti Malice, seem like enough to qualify her as a notable character. --Noclevername (talk) 02:32, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

Okay, since no one has come up with any distinct reasoning for calling a pivotal character "non-notable", I've removed that deletion tag for now. If anyone has any clear reasons, then the tag can be replaced. --Noclevername (talk) 19:31, 27 July 2008 (UTC)
 * "Notable", as used here, refers to Wikipedia's notability guideline. Basically, that guideline says: "If a topic has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject, it is presumed to be notable." However, these independent sources seem to be missing here: While other may have written about the Wild Cards series, there's no indication that sources exist about this particular character. Rather, the article is entirely a plot summary, based on the work of fiction itself; this is not appropriate for an encyclopedia. --B. Wolterding (talk) 11:35, 15 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Based on the scanty available information, the simplest thing to do was to redirect it to the list of characters, which i boldly did. (there was no point in prodded something that was likely to be challenged.) If anyone wants to expand that to a merge, go right ahead, but i doubt this is a viable separate article at this point.