Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Chas Chandler (character)


 * 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 no consensus. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont)  17:20, 2 March 2021 (UTC)

Chas Chandler (character)

 * – ( View AfD View log )

A fictional character, no reception/analysis, just a plot summary and list of appearances. PRODed with " The coverage (references, external links, etc.) does not seem sufficient to justify this article passing General notability guideline and the more detailed Notability (fiction) requirement. WP:BEFORE did not reveal any significant coverage on Gnews, Gbooks or Gscholar. ". PROD removed with a copy-paste edit summary by User:Andrew Davidson. Half a year later, the article isn't improved (just a bit more WP:FANCRUFT added). Given that the PROD has been removed, I don't want to stealthily redirect it without discussion. I therefore suggest soft deletion by redirecting this to List_of_Hellblazer_characters. Thoughts, comments? Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 09:48, 15 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here  09:48, 15 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Science fiction and fantasy-related deletion discussions. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here  09:48, 15 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Comics and animation-related deletion discussions. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here  09:48, 15 February 2021 (UTC)


 * Speedy Keep The nomination is not policy-based – WP:FANCRUFT is an essay with no official standing. And it is apparent that the nominator is abusing Prod/AfD to try to force someone to work on the article, contrary to WP:NOTCLEANUP and WP:NOTCOMPULSORY: "Focus on improving the encyclopedia itself, rather than demanding more from other Wikipedians."
 * As for the topic, it already has a good selection of sources and it is easy to find more such as this good account of the character or the Encyclopedia of Weird Detectives.
 * So, the policy WP:ATD applies as usual – "If editing can improve the page, this should be done rather than deleting the page." – and deletion processes are not appropriate.
 * Andrew🐉(talk) 10:27, 15 February 2021 (UTC)
 * , What makes "bamsmackpow.com" a WP:RS? As for the Encyclopedia, all I am seeing there is a passing mention in a sentence that lists a number of different characters, so it seems he doesn't even have as much a single sentence dedicated solely to himself there. If there is anything that meets SIGCOV there, please provide a page number or a quotation. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 06:37, 24 February 2021 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Eddie891 Talk Work 18:44, 22 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep: Deletion is not cleanup, coverage for television and movie appearances suggest notability. Etzedek24 (I'll talk at ya) (Check my track record) 16:51, 23 February 2021 (UTC)
 * , What coverage? Could you list any sources that provide any that meets WP:SIGCOV? TIA. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 06:11, 24 February 2021 (UTC)
 * , Between what Andrew D has offered and the sources in the article, I find it is a slim pass of GNG. And I have to echo the comments about how these nominations verge on abuse of PROD/AfD. Etzedek24 (I'll talk at ya) (Check my track record) 06:18, 24 February 2021 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it.</b> 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.