Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Aphrodite Lafont


 * 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   delete. -- Cirt (talk) 05:27, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

Aphrodite Lafont

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Article about some book character who is not notable. The main character does not even have her own page. Username1234567891011 (talk) 19:53, 9 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete - no third party coverage readily available through the internet. --Anthem of joy (talk) 20:24, 9 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions.  — • Gene93k (talk) 16:17, 11 May 2011 (UTC) --
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions.  — • Gene93k (talk) 16:17, 11 May 2011 (UTC)

See also List of characters in the House of Night series --Username1234567891011 (talk) 19:20, 12 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom, Sadads (talk) 16:20, 11 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete While fictional characters from notable works should normally be merged or redirected to the work, I can't even determine from the article which book the character derives. If anyone can identify such a work that is notable and has its own Wikipedia article, I'd be happy to see this merged or redirected there. Jclemens (talk) 18:37, 11 May 2011 (UTC)
 * She is from The House of Night series. --Username1234567891011 (talk) 23:12, 11 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Merge or Redirect to House_of_Night_(series) per WP:BEFORE. --Malkinann (talk) 00:23, 12 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete The fictional character does not meet the general notability guideline because it does not provide reliable third-party sources independent of the subject and a search engine test shows unreliable sources only. The article is also a plot-only description of a fictional work with no real-world context so there is no reason to keep it around. Jfgslo (talk) 04:43, 16 May 2011 (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.