Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Carey Martin (2nd nomination)


 * 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 redirect to The Suite Life of Zack & Cody. Salvio 11:28, 25 August 2020 (UTC)

Carey Martin
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

The coverage (references, external links, etc.) does not seem sufficient to justify this article passing General notability guideline and the more detailed Notability (biographies) Notability (fiction) requirement. WP:BEFORE did not reveal any significant English-language coverage on Gnews, Gbooks or Gscholar. The keep from 2013 was because  of the two votes, one stating that 'a character that appeared in 83 episodes is notable' and another 'keep per'. Sigh. I think our standards are a bit higher now. (Oh, this is also totally unreferenced... and pure WP:OR/WP:PLOT). Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 02:44, 17 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here  02:44, 17 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here  02:44, 17 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Speedy keep. This nomination is so erroneous, citing Notability (biographies), which applies only to actual living people, on a page whose subject is a fictional character, giving rise to serious question as to whether the nominator has read ad understood the article and guideline in question. The Big Bad Wolfowitz (aka Hullaballoo). Treated like dirt by many administrators since 2006.  Fight for freedom, stand with Hong Kong! (talk) 04:27, 17 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Sorry I linked the wrong guideline, a copy paste typo. I did properly categorize the AfDs, fortunately. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 04:36, 18 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Redirect to The Suite Life of Zack & Cody, alright, nomination has a problem. WP:NOTBURO applies, as that doesn't change the fact that this article is completely unsourced, meaning the character is clearly not notable, as they fail WP:GNG. The article currently fails WP:PLOT as well. Devonian Wombat (talk) 10:55, 17 August 2020 (UTC)
 * That's not a good redirect target at all. The character appeared in The Suite Life of Zack & Cody but then also appeared in the spin-off and, I think, in the TV movie as well. -- Aussie Legend  ( ✉ ) 16:02, 17 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Well those are clearly supplementary media, meaning that the original TV show is clearly the best redirect target. Of course, if you do not think that is a good redirect target I would be fine deleting the article without one. At the moment, no-one has given any reason for her being notable besides “well she appeared in lots of episodes”. Devonian Wombat (talk) 23:06, 17 August 2020 (UTC)
 * The character appeared in two series so you need to cover both in the information on the character but it wouldn't be appropriate to include information about the second series in the first series' article. That's why a separate character article exists. -- Aussie Legend  ( ✉ ) 05:48, 18 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep - If you are going to nominate something for deletion, please don't make up things. At no time did anyone say "a character that appeared in 83 episodes is notable". This is the second time the nom has used this. In fact the series had 87 episodes and the character subsequently appeared as a recurring character in the spin-off. Also, there were 3 keeps, not 2. Misrepresenting the number of keeps is something the nom has done at another AfD. -- Aussie Legend  ( ✉ ) 16:02, 17 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Seriously this is what you yourself said in the past AfD, it's right there at top: "The character is a major character in a televison series that spanned 87 episodes and has had a significant role in another. The character is clearly notable". As for the number of keep, sure, three. All with very bad rationales not based on policy, and all should be disregarded back then just as they should be right now. Fortunatley, our standards are improving. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 04:38, 18 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Where did I say 83? This is the same number that you've used in two AfDs and it's been wrong in both cases. You failed to mention the other appearances of the character and you misrepresented the voting in the AfD. -- Aussie Legend  ( ✉ ) 05:44, 18 August 2020 (UTC)
 * 83, 87... it's splitting the hair. And totally irrelevant to the fact that this article fails WP:V and WP:GNG. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 06:17, 18 August 2020 (UTC)
 * The term is "splitting hairs" and no, it's not. You have made this error in multiple AfDs. In one you somehow mixed 158 with 83. When you start an AfD you need to be accurate and not misrepresent facts, which is what you have been doing. -- Aussie Legend  ( ✉ ) 06:43, 18 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete the article is even totally unreferenced so it fails WP:V as well as WP:GNG - GizzyCatBella  🍁  04:48, 18 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete or redirect. With the exclusion of the guideline mistake, the nomination is completely sound, so nitpicking on the minor details is pointless. The article completely fails WP:GNG, and not a single source has been shown to exist in either AfD. TTN (talk) 20:54, 18 August 2020 (UTC)
 * The guideline mistake AND the number of episodes AND misrepresentation of the previous AfD !votes. -- Aussie Legend  ( ✉ ) 01:44, 19 August 2020 (UTC)
 * You're ultimately going down the wrong train of thought. Trout the nominator all you want, it doesn't really change the article's issues. Anything after the guideline issue is small potatoes not worth bothering with unless you're really that much of a stickler about having them to fully clarify and correct what you'd consider an error. TTN (talk) 02:02, 19 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Redirect to the show's article. GhostDestroyer100 (talk) 19:33, 19 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Redirect to The Suite Life of Zack & Cody as it's a plausible search term Spiderone  10:12, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete / redirect due to a lack of reliable sources with significant coverage. Procedural criticisms aside, the nomination is completely accurate, and we can't keep this article without WP:SIGCOV. Jontesta (talk) 15:05, 22 August 2020 (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.