Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Coronation Street characters (1991) (2nd nomination)


 * 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   delete. seriously guys, the meta consensus us clear, a series of organised lists either by alphabet or decades is the way but a single year with no content. This is nobrainer. Spartaz Humbug! 06:09, 6 November 2011 (UTC)

List of Coronation Street characters (1991)
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log )

This article contains no context, only a link to another page. The entire batch "Coronation Street Characters" pages should be grouped via decade because of lack of context. Touch Of Light (talk) 06:11, 29 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment. Are you proposing a merge by decade or deletion here? There doesn't appear to be any discussion re. merging on the article's talk page, or for that matter any discussion at all there. Perhaps starting a discussion at Talk:Lists of Coronation Street characters would be appropriate.--Michig (talk) 08:04, 29 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep/merge Merger is not performed by deletion. Warden (talk) 08:08, 29 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 01:31, 30 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 01:32, 30 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Keep as far as the keep vs. delete option goes, although I entirely agree that a better presentation of these characters is a reasonable editorial decision. Jclemens (talk) 05:06, 30 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Redirect/Delete. Are we talking about the same article? I'm going to copy/paste the entire content of the article into this comment. Here we go:


 * That's it, but for templates (and Main is a template too!). Surely there's a better option, and surely this person wasn't the only character in this season. I'll admit I'm not familiar with the show, but if the cast in this year matched that of a previous (or subsequent) year, then add a note to that list with "The cast returned for the 1991 series, but for the addition of Raquel Watts and the departure of Whomever." And then you add your profile and your main article link and move on. If it's just gonna be one name, then that's not sufficient. It's possible merging/redirecting other series articles may be prudent, but that's out of scope for this debate. UltraExactZZ Said~ Did 14:32, 3 November 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete for want of any other options. A merge is impossible, because this "list" contains nothing whatsoever, and a redirect is inappropriate because it is a highly unlikely search term. I'm amazed that organizing our presentation of this subject matter by removing a useless empty page is not considered a reasonable editorial decision by some of the above keep !voters and I suggest this is just an automatic aversion to typing the dreaded "d word" than a genuine evaluation of the page in question. Seriously, this one is a no-brainer. Reyk  YO!  21:01, 3 November 2011 (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.