Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bruticus


 * 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. The two keep votes have absolutely zero grounding in policy, so I am ignoring both of them. Courcelles 00:57, 23 September 2010 (UTC)

Bruticus

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

Fictional character that appears not to pass WP:GNG, sources are all primary, no individual notability asserted. Normally would merge to character list, but no list appears to exist. Black Kite (t) (c) 22:52, 15 September 2010 (UTC) Black Kite (t) (c) 22:52, 15 September 2010 (UTC)  Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:00, 22 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 23:49, 15 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep - It's big bad battlein Bruticus! He's freaking famous. Mathewignash (talk) 01:50, 16 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep: OK already! - Ret.Prof (talk) 00:45, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.


 * Delete Big? Yes.  Bad?  Sure.  Notable and verifiable in reliable sources?  Heck no. Andrew Lenahan -  St ar bli nd  19:53, 22 September 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.