Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bernardo O'Reilly


 * 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   merge to The Magnificent Seven . The consensus seems to be to merge, and, as a result of the discussion here, the nom agrees with that also   DGG ( talk ) 05:43, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

Bernardo O'Reilly
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

No indication of notability whatsoever. Does not meet WP:N. Crusio (talk) 14:40, 10 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions.  -- Crusio (talk) 14:41, 10 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment. This article is about a character from the film The Magnificent Seven. - Smerdis of Tlön (talk) 15:04, 10 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 16:13, 10 March 2010 (UTC)
 * merge or keep, there is some indication of notability unless those footnotes don't go anywhere. Polarpanda (talk) 19:31, 10 March 2010 (UTC)
 * What do You mean "don't go anywhere"? They're absolutely accessible for everyone. Anyone, who wants, can easily check them. Please, describe Your opinion more clearly. -- SerdechnyG (talk) 19:36, 10 March 2010 (UTC)


 * Comment this is a notable character who has received quite a bit of 3rd-party coverage in reliable sources. Surely this can at least be merged with other characters from the same film? Andrew Lenahan -  St ar bli nd  19:37, 10 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Absolutely No. For instance, Vin and Chico hasn't such popularity in russian-speaking world like O'Reilly and Britt. It's not a characters. It's a pillars of american cinema. I will reply with his words: "Be proud of him!". Don't waste your national heritage. Never thought that russian can ever persuade americans to save american characters, virtually their imperishable property, from guess "what?" - from deletion! Sounds like delirium. -- SerdechnyG (talk) 19:51, 10 March 2010 (UTC)
 * P.S. Next time, when somebody nominate Elvis for deletion (under the same reasons as mentioned above) - don't tell me about it cause I will die from laughter. -- SerdechnyG (talk) 20:02, 10 March 2010 (UTC)


 * Redirect to The Magnificent Seven. No notability independent of the subject. Slivers of worthwhile production info can be merged to the film article. --EEMIV (talk) 12:44, 12 March 2010 (UTC)
 * keep Widely known character, present in several sequels and influential in many other Westerns and other dramatic fiction. A significant role in the career of a highly notable actor. Existing refs are more than sufficient to establish notability. The article could use improvement, but there is no reason to delete it. DES (talk) 21:25, 12 March 2010 (UTC)


 * keep or Merge. Widely known character which has received good coverage in reliable sources. I would suggest having a single big article on all the seven characters of the Magnificent Seven. With the quality of sources available in Gbooks and the Russian language sources SerdechnyG has added, a single article has a good chance of making it to GA or FA status. And it would be far more convenient to have them all in a single article.--Sodabottle (talk) 17:08, 13 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment Wouldn't merging to The Magnificent Seven be more logical? --Crusio (talk) 17:16, 13 March 2010 (UTC)


 * The characters have appeared in a lot of sequels and (i think) some print tie-ins as well. So it would better to have a separate article for the characters rather than putting them all in the first film's article. --Sodabottle (talk) 17:25, 13 March 2010 (UTC)


 * Merge to The Magnificent Seven.--Rockfang (talk) 07:06, 14 March 2010 (UTC)
 * keep. Wikipedia has load of articles about fictional characters, so clearly there cannot be an objection in principle to having articles on fictional characters.  The film is extremely well known.  There is no reason why the article cannot be developed to become a good article.--Toddy1 (talk) 16:48, 14 March 2010 (UTC)


 * Keep as a potential topic that should be researched further. However, The Magnificent Seven is very sparse, so if there is not that much about this character, we should be able to put together a strong "Cast" or "Characters" section at the film article.  If we can write about three, four, or more paragraphs about the character alone (with secondary sources, not the film), then a stand-alone article could work. Erik (talk) 13:42, 16 March 2010 (UTC)
 * So do you recommended an outright keep or a merge? --Crusio (talk) 14:50, 16 March 2010 (UTC)


 * Merge to the main film article. I don't see the notability inherent in a google search for books on the Magnificent Seven. Alastairward (talk) 19:31, 16 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Since there a multiple films a separate "characters in..." article would seem appropriate if there is a merge.
 * DESiegel, it depends on the amount of material available. While cited, the depiction, production and critical reaction sections are sparse and could well be trimmed. Alastairward (talk) 21:54, 17 March 2010 (UTC)


 * Merge As the nom, I change my vote from delete to merge, as suggested by Erik. There is obviously not enough material for a stand-alone article on this character. --Crusio (talk) 19:55, 17 March 2010 (UTC)
 * What rule or regulation states that such content "is obviously not enough"? Or maybe it's your own thoughts? -- SerdechnyG (talk) 20:23, 17 March 2010 (UTC)
 * There are no rules about what is enough or not. Yes, this is my very considered own opinion. And if you care to read the comments above, you will see that I am not alone in thinking this. --Crusio (talk) 21:06, 17 March 2010 (UTC)
 * As well as I. -- SerdechnyG (talk) 21:29, 17 March 2010 (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.