Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kurj Skolia


 * 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. As no consensus defaults to keep, discussion to merge can continue on the article's talk page. – Juliancolton  &#124; Talk 00:07, 26 July 2009 (UTC)

Kurj Skolia

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

unsourced. non-notable fictional character bio that is inappropriate for inclusion. delete. Jack Merridew 08:22, 18 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions.  -- Jack Merridew 08:22, 18 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science fiction-related deletion discussions.  -- Jack Merridew 08:23, 18 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions.  -- TexasAndroid (talk) 13:43, 18 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Merge to an appropriate character list. Edward321 (talk) 13:58, 18 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Changing to Keep Central character in a series that has won several awards, including two Nebula Awards. Edward321 (talk) 02:54, 19 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep as on of the central characters of the Saga of the Skolian Empire series. Otherwise merge per previous editor. Debresser (talk) 18:40, 18 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Notability is not inherited. Abductive (talk) 23:30, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
 * merge or keep Any significant character in a notable work  should get a one or two paragraph description. If it's a sufficiently major character, it should get an article.   We're here to provide encyclopedic information--and if the main work is worth covering in the first place, people are likely to want some degree of detail. Why else would you use an encyclopedia  in the first place, if you didn't want detailed coverage? And,   there is certainly no   valid reason why there should not at least be a redirect.    Anything anyone might want to look up should have a redirect if there's relevant content in Wikipedia.  DGG (talk) 00:50, 19 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete - not notable in real world, only to plot. WP:WAF and WP:NOT. These articles about minor characters from the same series could have been combined. Savidan 17:43, 20 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete, as shows, no real world notability, no scholarly analyses, no internet buzz even. Abductive (talk) 20:59, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep Those above have already mentioned some great reasons to keep it. If the series is notable, then all the major characters in it are notable enough to have their own articles.   D r e a m Focus  21:00, 22 July 2009 (UTC)
 * I don't believe that is a guideline or policy on Wikipedia. There is, however, a policy WP:NOT, which this article violates. Abductive (talk) 21:13, 22 July 2009 (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.