Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Annie Cartwright


 * 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 '''Procedural close. This is a faulty bot listing (the bot isn't faulty, but the listing is) - the article in question is already being discussed at Articles for deletion/Sam Tyler. Further comments should be at that AfD discussion.' Grutness...wha? '' 23:09, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Fix heading. D ARTH P ANDA duel 02:06, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

Annie Cartwright

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

Establishes no claim to notability for this character, and does not provide substantial third-party references to establish notability. This character isn't widely documented or studied in the arts, and therefore is not notable enough to warrant a Wikipedia article. Listing for AfD per WP:NF. Mikeblas (talk) 01:29, 29 November 2008 (UTC) Strong Keep - for all reasons stated above. Police,Mad,Jack (talk · contribs) ☺ 09:37, 29 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep. This is an article about a principle character in an internationally broadcast television drama; it is absurd to suggest that it isn't notable because it "isn't studied in the arts". As the drama series has its own project notability isn't in question. Numerous other Wikipedia article also link to this article. Article is well referenced, and should not have been nominated, this is just tying up AFD time.andi064 T . C 09:25, 29 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Strong Keep - there is absolutely no reason why this should even be considered. Character is a major part of series and if she was taken out then Sam Tyler and Gene Hunt would too. (Quentin X (talk) 11:29, 29 November 2008 (UTC))
 * Merge: to show's article. Ryan 4314   (talk) 17:50, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
 * This AfD nomination was incomplete. It is listed now. DumbBOT (talk) 19:03, 1 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep A principal character in an important show. That's a sufficient criterion. I'd accept a merge, but only if the entire contents were merged,and could be maintained there. Organizing the material isn't what's important here; its keeping the material. Experience shows that such merged information often tends to get whittled down, and then the merged list of characters even gets nominated for deletion, sometimes for having insufficient content. Not saying it will necessarily happen here, but it does happen.  DGG (talk) 19:18, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete No reliable sources. None.  Since when do we keep non-stub articles that don't have reliable sources?  Powers T 19:42, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Redirect to Life_on_Mars_(TV_series) List of Life on Mars characters. Certainly worth a redirect, however there are two issues. First, as noted above, the lack of any reliable sources - one blog does not cut the mustard.  Second, and more important (imo) there is no real world perspective.  The proposed guidelines on notabilty for fictional topics say that "individual character articles ... should only be created when the alternatives are not feasible".  The same article suggests a helpful question: "How does the reader's understanding of this topic suffer if this fictional element is ... only summarized in the main article?" Not at all, imo. Springnuts (talk) 20:40, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Redirect to List of Life on Mars characters. The character has no "life" beyond the series and no useful sources to base the article upon. But in the list of characters, some of the information would be useful (albeit still lacking sources). ➨ ❝ ЯEDVERS ❞ a sweet and tender hooligan 20:55, 1 December 2008 (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.