Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lady Christina de Souza


 * 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. No arguments for deletion aside from the nominator. (non-admin closure) Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:04, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

Lady Christina de Souza

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

For the same reasons stated for Adam Mitchell. Companion has only appeared in a single episode and fails to warrant an article of her own. Merger and deletion of main article suggested. magnius (talk) 15:50, 21 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Keep- Plenty of out of universe information in the article, so hardly your typical one-shot character. Meets the GNG by light years, and there's simply too much verifiable out of universe information in the article that a merge isn't a viable option either. Umbralcorax (talk) 16:27, 21 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep: Passes WP:N. Joe Chill (talk) 19:12, 21 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep: My reading of WP:N for these articles is the amount out of universe information available. Although this character appears in only one episode, she is played by a well known actress, and the casting made an impact at the time so there are lots of production and reception information. Edgepedia (talk) 05:12, 22 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 19:54, 23 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 19:54, 23 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science fiction-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 19:55, 23 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep Plenty of independent RS coverage. The fact that the character wasn't all that important isn't actually a detriment to notability, given the coverage. Jclemens (talk) 22:07, 23 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep seen enough sources to WP:verify notability. Shooterwalker (talk) 22:55, 27 June 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.