Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/James Potter II


 * 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) 01:21, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

James Potter II

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

Prod removed by creator. Fictional character from an unauthorized continuation which exists only on the web. Pretty much fails any kind of inclusion criteria. 98.248.33.198 (talk) 02:00, 1 January 2010 (UTC) Nom on behalf of the above IP. RMHED (talk) 02:50, 1 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete no basis for notability. Handschuh-talk to me 06:10, 1 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete. Content is non-canon. Sjakkalle (Check!)  11:13, 1 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete. Character is mentioned in canon, but briefly at the end and thus lacking WP:Notability and WP:Reliable sources and a WP:Stub that can't be expanded to have encyclopedic value WP:MISTAKE.  Otherwise, WP:MADEUP.  Incidentally, James Potter (character) is best redirected to Order of the Phoenix (organisation). Шизомби (talk) 14:59, 1 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Redirect to a list of HP minor characters. The minor mention makes it canon, but a separate article is not notable. When more information from a canonical source is provided, then an article may be up for consideration. MMetro (talk) 21:20, 4 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Strong delete, NOT redirect - as written, this is not about the canonical but extremely minor character (whose name we don't know for sure), but rather a vanity insert of material from a piece of minor fanfiction. -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  00:17, 5 January 2010 (UTC)
 * The name "James" is in the book, but the "II" suffix is not, so I agree that a redirect is not in order here. Sjakkalle (Check!)  08:44, 5 January 2010 (UTC)
 * In fact, IIRC, the child of Harry is named James Sirius Potter, so a "II" would be wrong! -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  14:49, 5 January 2010 (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.