Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kerr Avon


 * 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 Keep. Paul Cyr 03:55, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

Kerr Avon
Delete or Merge to Characters from Blake's 7. These characters are not important/interesting enough to all have short pages of their own. Zargulon 14:10, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

I am also nominating the following articles
 * Roj Blake
 * Cally
 * Dayna Mellanby
 * Olag Gan
 * Jenna Stannis
 * Orac
 * Servalan
 * Slave (Blake's 7)
 * Soolin
 * Del Tarrant
 * Travis (Blake's 7)
 * Vila Restal
 * Zen (Blake's 7)
 * Zargulon 14:17, 22 July 2006 (UTC)


 * Merge all per nom. Voice of Treason 14:46, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep or at least renominate individually so we can consider each on their own merits. I get 21,000 Google hits for "Kerr Avon" (in quotes) and Avon +Blake's 7 gets 76,100.  Undoubtedly, at least some of these characters should have their own articles. Andrew Lenahan -  St ar bli nd  15:14, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
 * CommentI'd be interested to hear from you and other fans a list of who you think are the major characters.. perhaps they could keep their own pages. However ghits alone will not justify it.. for someone to have their own Wikipedia page they have to have a notable impact not only on the sci-fi universe or the fan community, but on the real world. Zargulon 15:48, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep per Andrew Lenahan. They're a bit short at the moment but could be expanded. Tim! 15:49, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Merge I don't think they need seperate pages, but it's worth having one page with information about all the major characters from the show. If you're keeping individual pages for the major characters, I'd say Blake, Avon and Servalan would qualify. Mark Grant 16:07, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep Sufficiently notable, being main characters in a well known, long running series and with good scope for expansion (due to their long history in the series). TigerShark 17:11, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
 * This is Articles for deletion. Only come here if you want an article deleted.  Merger does not involve deletion at any stage. As per Articles for deletion/Lyta Alexander, this nomination is misguided.  Again, research turns up plenty of secondary source material on these characters.  What is required is for these articles to cite it, to allow editors to see how much secondary source material there is on these subjects.  Keep. Uncle G 17:19, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
 * You could have said the above without the additional "this nomination is misguided" comment. Let's try to be nice, please. Also, the nomination mentions deletion and merging as an alternative, so having it under AFD is fine. TigerShark 17:36, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
 * There's nothing not nice about saying that a nomination is misguided, and this nomination is misguided, for the reason that I gave. If someone wants something merged, they should not nominate it for deletion.  One cannot merge content that is deleted.  Either one wants the articles deleted outright, or not.  If one wants a merger, then one does not.  Uncle G 11:02, 23 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep Blake, Avon, Cally, Servalan; possibly merge the rest. Not a job for AfD either way.  To Zargulon, Avon was the most significant character, Blake the eponymous leader and therefore important too, Servalan their arch-nemesis.  The series was originally scripted by Terry Nation.  I'd decide mainly on the basis of how much information exists. Just zis Guy you know? 17:51, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment Ok, thanks. Zargulon 22:51, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Whatever problems these articles may or may not have, lack of information is not one of them. There's been several books covering Blake's 7 (e.g. the unofficial Liberation: The Unofficial and Unauthorised Guide to Blake's 7 and A History and Critical Analysis of Blakes 7, the 1978-81 British Television Space Adventure) as well as lots of coverage in TV and sci-fi publications like Starlog, Radio Times, Cult Times, etc.  Some of the actors involved have even written autobiographies, I know Paul Darrow has.  Andrew Lenahan -  St ar bli nd  19:41, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Merge per Mark Grant. No need to remove this information, but centralizing it wouldn't be a bad idea. -- H·G (words/works) 19:44, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Strong Keep Show is sufficiently notable that individual character bios are appropriate. Possible some of the lesser characters should be merged with the main article, but that can be discussed on the indivual pages. Artw 20:05, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep all per the same arguments in the Babylon 5 AfD. Some of these characters may well be minor and should be merged into a "minor characters" article, but there is no reason to delete all. (Is there also an AfD planned for Jack O'Neill?) Fan-1967 21:35, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep all each of these characters can be expanded on and improved. Moving them to one page will limit them. The assertion by the nominator that they are not important or interesting is subjective. Any requests for blanket deletions/mergings should be treated, in my opinion, with caution. Mallanox 22:19, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment My opinion is the minor characters should be deleted and the major characters should be merged. I hope people will, as Mallanox suggests, treat it with caution. I am sorry if this has been percieved as misuse of AfD. Perhaps if we could form consensus around what should be merged, kept (or deleted) then at least something good could come of it. Zargulon 22:50, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
 * None are really minor characters, all were significant recurring characters in the show, not red-shirts who got one line before being killed. All are worth keeping in some form. Mark Grant 22:59, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep - some may merit their own article, add merge tags instead and see which get disputed .Yomangani 00:20, 24 July 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.