Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Captain Chaos


 * 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   keep. King of &hearts;   &diams;   &clubs;  &spades; 09:18, 4 October 2011 (UTC)

Captain Chaos

 * – ( View AfD View log )

This alter-ego non-character is not really notable. FWIW, none of the real characters in The Cannonball Run have their own pages D O N D E groovily   Talk to me  04:10, 27 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions.  —Tom Morris (talk) 08:35, 27 September 2011 (UTC)


 * Redirect to The Cannonball Run... no reason this needs a full AfD. Powers T 13:30, 27 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions.  — • Gene93k (talk) 19:09, 27 September 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete: Unreferenced article which subject, the alter-ego of a fictional character, does not meet the general notability guideline and the article itself is a summary-only description, unsuitable for Wikipedia. Jfgslo (talk) 01:07, 30 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep While not adverse to a proper merge and redirect, the character of Captain Chaos has enough coverage in books and news to meet WP:GNG. Article will need cleanup, yes... but it is no longer unsourced.  And that other Cannonball Run characters do not have articles is more an argument for their creation (if enough sources exist to meet WP:GNG) than it is an argument for deletion... and FWIW, at one time Wikipdia did not have articles for fictional characters Luke Skywalker, Chewbacca, Princess Leia or even James T. Kirk. ANY article is created or allowed through application of guideline, whether for a fictional character or not... and as with ANY article, we deal with sourcability and verifiability, not what does not (yet) exist.  If this was a real person, rather than fictional, it is easy to see that WP:GNG is met.     Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 08:08, 1 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep I agree. New York Times says the character was one of the only three reasons to sit through the films.  They show a video clip of him even.  The book results seem to add to his notability as well.   D r e a m Focus  09:30, 1 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep per the new sources found. No objection to an editorial merge into a list of cannonball run characters, which could certainly be fleshed out with descriptions of the other major characters. Jclemens (talk) 00:47, 3 October 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.