Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cho Chang


 * 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 speedy keep. Major character in major series. Luna Santin 09:26, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

Cho Chang


A rather large and extremely crufty article on one supporting character in a novel. Not notable at all if you ask me. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Necrobrawler (talk • contribs)
 * Keep - She seems to be a significant character, and as far as biographies of fictional characters go, this one actually doesn't look half bad. (NB: User had Prod'ed this article rather than putting an AfD tag on it and the Prod was removed. I've taken the view that since the AfD was in the log, it should in fact be dealt with as one). BigHaz - Schreit mich an 06:56, 14 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Strong Keep - I have listed the reasons why this article should not be deleted on Talk:Cho Chang, but I will reproduce them here for the sake of simplicity. There are numerous reasons why a deletion of this article would be frivolous.


 * Attempting to place all the information contained within this article into a larger Harry Potter article would be extremely difficult, not to mention very messy.
 * This article is an important part of WikiProject Harry Potter, and deleting it would cause more harm than good.
 * A fictional character in a book does not merit his/her own article? Please see Harry Potter, Artemis Fowl, Peregrin Took, and numerous other fictional characters on Wikipedia.
 * Extensive research and work has been put into this article by many Wikipedians, and their efforts should be recognized instead of destroyed.
 * This article is actually a good example of how to write an article about an important character in a fictional novel. I may be wrong, but after being on Wikipedia for over a year, I think this is certainly better than many other articles about fictional characters. It is concise and has an active community of editors who put in time and research into the article.
 * "Not notable at all if you ask me" is not a good reason for deletion. Not notable for what? Lack of sources? The references are placed down at the end of the article. Not notable as a character? Seeing that Cho Chang played a huge role in the fourth and fifth novels of Harry Potter, and a notable role in the fourth movie, she is, on the contrary, one of the most well-recognized Harry Potter characters. –-  kungming·  2 | (Talk ·Contact) 06:57, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment - Necrobrawler is a very new user, registering on November 5, 2006. He/She has had 11 edits so far, and most are his own deletion notices on other Harry Potter articles. One link counts as possible blanking vandalism, and he/she also created a template {noob}} which I am in the process of nominating for TfD. That template does nothing more than print: You are a noob. You beg for free stuff. Will interested parties in the AfD take that into account. The lack of a signing signature when nominating this for AfD also signifies that Necrobrawler does not understand WP:DELETE some editing guidelines as well. –-  kungming·  2 | (Talk ·Contact) 07:03, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment - assume good faith here, please. Many established users forget to sign their contributions to AfDs once in a while, but that doesn't mean that they don't understand the policy. BigHaz - Schreit mich an 07:28, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment - Agree - I forget quite often, too! =) I suggest Necrobrawler spend more time on Wikipedia, and increase his/her experience first, though. It takes time. –-  kungming·  2 | (Talk ·Contact) 07:33, 14 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Speedy keep Bad faith nomination. Obviously notable. MartinDK 07:30, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Speedy keep, bad faith nom from suspiciously low-edit count nominator. I don't expect new users to know what "crufty" means. hateless 07:41, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep Supporting character, yes, but an important one. Makes quite an impact on the main character and, therefore, on the plots of the books. Shimeru 07:44, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep bad faith vandalism nom. Ben W Bell   talk  08:27, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep. Notable.  I'd agree it's slightyly over-done, but that's no reason to delete the whole thing.  Spinach Dip 09:21, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Speedy keep and close, AGF extends only so far. I also back up Hateless's point about the doubt caused when a user with 11 edits uses the word "crufty". Daniel.Bryant [ T · C ] 09:24, 14 November 2006 (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.