Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kristin Westphalen


 * 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 No consensus -- JForget 00:58, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Kristin Westphalen

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

This is a character that does not have real world information to establish notability. It is currently covered within the main article, and there is no current assertion for improvement. TTN (talk) 19:19, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep Again, I call into question why articles such as Jean-Luc Picard, Randy Marsh, Niles Crane, Dr. Who, and other fictional character articles are allowed to exist, yet, you're targeting this one. Explain. Kyle C Haight (talk) 20:04, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Please read WP:WAX. --lifebaka (Talk - Contribs) 21:30, 15 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep Nominator seems to try to illustrate a point. Nominator hasn't even suggested the possibility of adressing the issue through discussion but started page blanking and redirecting and now an AfD after meeting opposition. The subject is NOT discussed is the main article. There are rooms for improvements, by making a List of seaQuest DSV characters which in my eyes has enough notability. It should go to the main article but that would make the article too big, therefor a separate article could be created. I'm opposed to this AfD but advocate efforts to merge single character articles into a List as I do agree that a single character from the show does not meet notability criteria. However, as pointed out, I see room for improvement. --Fogeltje (talk) 20:30, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete due to lack of sources. No opposition to merging into main article or list of characters.  --lifebaka (Talk - Contribs) 21:30, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Merging would be my plan, which is what nominator should have attempted or suggested. If articles get deleted, merging becomes much more difficult as the articles are well written, but need shortening to be incorporated into a new list.--Fogeltje (talk) 10:56, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep There were references, they were put in incorrectly, I fixed them. (Dr. Stantz (talk) 01:55, 16 January 2008 (UTC))
 * Delete per nom. Eusebeus (talk) 05:11, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom and WP:FICT. Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 06:55, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Nominator uses flawed reasoning in violation of WP:POINT in my eyes and WP:FICT has no consensus and disputed.--Fogeltje (talk) 10:56, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Update: Real-world background information has been added. The original complaint no longer has validity. Kyle C Haight (talk) 09:20, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
 * I'm afraid it will still not satisfy WP:N and ever will. Short character bios can be placed into a List of seaQuest DSV characters in my eyes. This would have to be placed within the article of the show, which is notable. However, that article would become unnecessarily long so a separate list can be justified. However, nominator hasn't even attempted anything like this and is simply blanking and redirecting and then taking it to AfD when he fails. My vote is not a vote to keep it indefinitely but to keep it around for a while so we can properly discuss on how to keep the information and possibly merge it into something different.--Fogeltje (talk) 10:56, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep This article should be redirected and merged to a more appropriate article, not deleted. Catchpole (talk) 12:28, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
 * keep and don't merge mergeing would unbalance the main article.Genisock2 (talk) 02:38, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
 * delete unless sources can added to address lack of real world context and notability. Ridernyc (talk) 09:21, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep. Merge - Yes.  Delete - No.  -- Shakata Ga Nai  Talk 04:59, 19 January 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.