Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kelly Taylor (EastEnders)


 * 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The result was withdrawn by nominator. Non-admin closure. – sgeureka t•c 09:15, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

Kelly Taylor (EastEnders)

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

This fictional TV character, although played by a very good looking actress, is not notable. The page is free of sources that would spell out her notablity in the real world. If anyone is wondering why I picked her, it is a test case to see what sort of argumentation is employed in this AfD debate. Perhaps I'm wrong, and all of the characters of a British soap opera are notable in some way that I haven't imagined yet. Fee Fi Foe Fum 23:44, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep I realise it was all just in-universe plot summary when nominated, but I started adding some real world info to this tonight, and will do some more tomorrow. Gung adin  ♦  02:07, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep, thanks to Gungadin's changes it is now more than plot summary. anemone  I  projectors  19:24, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete unless the plot elements sections are massively trimmed. 3 paragraphs of character development is over shadowed by massive plot summaries. Ridernyc 21:14, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment If you think that's the case then tag it for cleanup, but a long plot summary is not a valid reason to delete this page. Almost every article on wikipedia can be improved. There is no deadline for improvement and this article does no violate any policy as it stands. It has sourced real world information, which can and will be extended. Gung  adin  ♦  21:25, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * the section that would satisfy WP:Plot has one source. Ridernyc 22:32, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * You are suggesting that "character creation" is the only real world stuff, which isnt true. The "character development" section satifies WP:PLOT, and it uses numerous references. Have you actually read that part? It has information on ratings, criticism, comments from the actress and storyline development. WP:PLOT says "Wikipedia articles on published works (such as fictional stories) should cover their real-world context and sourced analysis, offering detail on a work's development, impact or historical significance". This article covers that. The in-universe plot summary is under "storylines".  Gung  adin  ♦  22:56, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * It also says "A brief plot summary may sometimes be appropriate as an aspect of a larger topic" notice the brief? The plot summaries are to support the real world context, not the other way around.  This article is minor real world context to support a massive plot summary.  Ridernyc 23:17, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * So you realise that you made an error by suggesting that character creation is the only part that satisfies WP:PLOT? and the difference in the amount of plot summary vs real world info is nowhere near as big as you originally claimed. If so, then all it requires is a "plot cleanup tag", there's no need for it to be deleted. Gung adin  ♦  23:43, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * No and don't twist my words. I admire you for having a devotion to this but have you though about finding or starting an east enders wiki. Ridernyc 00:02, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
 * I honestly wasn't trying to twist your words, I just wanted you to clarify because I didnt think your original reason for objecting was still applicable (as you thought there was less real world info that there actually was). I was being optimistic, hoping you might change your opinion once you realised :) To answer your question, yes I think that an EE wiki is a good idea, but this article is not a candidate for a wikia, as it has plenty of real world coverage. I've just extended the real world section even more. Gung  adin  ♦  01:38, 4 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Keep, admins, I withdraw this nomination as much wonderful sourcing has been added. The excessive amount of plot summary is a cleanup issue for another day. Fee Fi Foe Fum 07:26, 4 December 2007 (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.