Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dee-Dee


 * 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. Cirt (talk) 13:15, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

Dee-Dee

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

This character article does not establish notability independent of Batman Beyond through the inclusion of real world information from reliable, third party sources. Most of the information is made up of original research and unnecessary plot details. There is no current assertion for future improvement of the article, so extended coverage is unnecessary. TTN (talk) 22:13, 3 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Redirect to a list of characters and merge heavily reduced information (which would take care of referencing issues). There's enough reliable sources on any named fictional universe if you bother looking it up. I'll cite the main AFD page:
 * "If the page can be improved, this should be solved through regular editing, rather than deletion."
 * "Read the article to properly understand its topic. Note that stubs and imperfect articles are awaiting further development and so the potential of the topic should be considered."
 * "Consider making the page a useful redirect or proposing it be merged rather than deleted. Neither of these actions requires an AfD."
 * "When nominating an article for deletion due to sourcing concerns, a good-faith attempt should be made to confirm that such sources aren't likely to exist."

TTN has not shown any attempt at finding sources before making the nomination. - Mgm|(talk) 00:13, 4 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete DO NOT REDIRECT to Batman Beyond. Clearly Dee Dee Ramone is a more likely choice for a destination. 76.66.194.58 (talk) 06:08, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete Does not establish notability through significant coverage of real world context in reliable secondary sources independent of the subject. Jay32183 (talk) 08:17, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep and consider a merge or a redirect at the appropriate place, which is not AfD. If there's a problem about multiple places where theredirect would be appropriate, a disam page is the solution. This should not have been brought here.DGG (talk) 14:45, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete: (no redirect) Not notable enough. Ryan 4314   (talk) 05:32, 8 December 2008 (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.