Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Frank Rossitano


 * 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  List of 30 Rock characters. causa sui (talk) 07:12, 18 July 2011 (UTC)

Frank Rossitano

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Not notable, no references to independently ascertain notability. Character is a supporting character in this show without and real world notability or recognition. Darkwarriorblake (talk) 11:54, 3 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions.  — • Gene93k (talk) 00:58, 4 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions.  — • Gene93k (talk) 00:58, 4 July 2011 (UTC)


 * Keep while all but one of the Google Books hits appear to be Wikipedia extracts and Google Scholar appears to have one paper mention repeated half a dozen times, there appear to be plenty of Google News references to this character. Having said that, I have no objection to editorial merge of this and other characters into a list article. Jclemens (talk) 01:23, 4 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment: I;m fine with him being merged, I don't think is any source which could warrant him specifically needing an article though. Even awards he is involved in have been ensemble cast ones, not one for himself.Darkwarriorblake (talk) 14:02, 4 July 2011 (UTC)


 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:05, 10 July 2011 (UTC)


 * Redirect to List of 30 Rock characters: The fictional character does not meet the general notability guideline and the article is mostly a plot-only description of a fictional work. Merely appearing in trivial mentions that do not make analytic or evaluative claims for the fictional character is not evidence of notability to presume that the fictional character deserves a stand-alone article. As the content is not referenced, I believe that a merge is not plausible. But, since the article title is a plausible search term, a redirect is a good alternative to deletion. Jfgslo (talk) 00:56, 16 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Redirect as mainly a WP:PLOT recap which is what Wikipedia is not. Does not have any sources to WP:verify notability. Shooterwalker (talk) 17:01, 16 July 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.