Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Anna Devane


 * 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 List of General Hospital characters. ✗ plicit  14:30, 30 May 2022 (UTC)

Anna Devane

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

Article is 100% overly-detailed plot summary and casting history, GNews entries are mostly tabloid-like material and recaps. Most references are primary or about the actress, Finola Hughes. Likely fails WP:GNG. –LaundryPizza03 ( d c̄ ) 01:08, 9 May 2022 (UTC) Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗  plicit  12:01, 16 May 2022 (UTC) Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗  plicit  14:14, 23 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women, Fictional elements,  and Television. –LaundryPizza03 ( d  c̄ ) 01:08, 9 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep on the assumptions that the listed refs are independent RS'es. Nothing wrong with trimming extensively, but deletion is not cleanup and this appears to be a notable fictional character. Jclemens (talk) 03:59, 9 May 2022 (UTC)
 * , are we escalating from refusal to look at relevant sources in Google News or Scholar, to refusal to review sources already cited in an article? Tsk. I've looked at the sourcing and confirm that there are sufficient independent RS already in the article; they say pretty much exactly what I thought they would. If you ask nicely, I'd be happy to share which ones I looked at with you if you amend your petulant and irrelevant WP:VAGUEWAVE at THEREMAYBESOURCES and agree to look at the sourcing already present in the article. Jclemens (talk) 07:32, 11 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Which part of the "Ping me if sources are found and a proper reception section is added, then I'll reconsider my vote"? If you don't feel like even discussing them here, then no, I don't feel I need to do anything except clarify I prefer SOFTDELETION through redirecting to hard deletion. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 09:08, 11 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Which part of "you need to evaluate the sources already in the article before you !vote" was unclear? You were neither asked nor expected to do anything more, and you've not, apparently, done even that. Jclemens (talk) 03:17, 16 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Redirect to List of General Hospital characters as the article is just a long, fancrufty plot summary. Unlke Jclemens, I am not AGFing that "listed refs" contain SIGCOV; WP:V clearly states that responsibility to prove this is on editors who want to write about this. As this hasn't ben done, this should no exist on the assumption that WP:THEREMAYBESOURCES. Ping me if sources are found and a proper reception section is added, then I'll reconsider my vote. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 14:29, 10 May 2022 (UTC)
 * <p class="xfd_relist" style="margin:0 0 0 -1em;border-top: 1px solid #AAA; border-bottom: 1px solid #AAA; padding: 0px 2em;"> Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * <p class="xfd_relist" style="margin:0 0 0 -1em;border-top: 1px solid #AAA; border-bottom: 1px solid #AAA; padding: 0px 2em;"> Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.


 * Redirect to List of General Hospital characters - The only actual sources being used that might actually be reliable and secondary are all just routine reporting on casting rumors/announcements. These are also almost entirely on the actress, not the fictional character. The vast bulk of the article is just a massive plot summary that is largely just sourced to official plot summaries that used to be posted on the network's site. Searching for additional sources just turns up more of the same - routine casting coverage, and minor mentions in plot summaries. That said, as a reasonable Redirect target exists, that would be preferable over deletion. Rorshacma (talk) 16:54, 23 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete/Redirect per Rorschacma, in the interest of building consensus. There's no WP:SIGCOV in these sources, and what little there is only recaps the WP:PLOT, which is WP:NOT enough for a Wikipedia article. A valid and obvious redirect target exists. Shooterwalker (talk) 22:32, 23 May 2022 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. <b style="color:red">Please do not modify it.</b> 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.