Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Fred characters (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. The delete side clearly makes more policy-based sense, and neither of the three anon keeps provide any justification whatsoever to keep the article. Courcelles 03:39, 26 September 2010 (UTC)

List of Fred characters
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

I don't see any purpose in having an article like this, its fan fluff. I don't think that characters with less than a minute of screen time are notable enough to have entire paragraphs written on them. 117Avenue (talk) 23:25, 18 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep Last deletion discussion didn't even have a single "delete" vote, so a further deletion discussion is ridiculous. Note that the nominator redirected this page to "Fred Figglehorn" without even bringing it up for discussion so clearly he has some agenda.  He's lucky he wasn't banned from Wikipedia for his nonsense.  108.124.109.158 (talk) 16:56, 19 September 2010 (UTC)

Keep. Wikipedia is not "things that 117Avenue likes." Deletion discussion is obviously out of spite because his redirect was reverted. 68.245.2.71 (talk) 17:19, 19 September 2010 (UTC) (talk) 18:54, 19 September 2010 (UTC) Snow Keep Nomination clearly out of spite.
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions.  -• Gene93k
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 18:54, 19 September 2010 (UTC)

 Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Cunard (talk) 00:07, 26 September 2010 (UTC)
 * VERY weak keep  Don't like the fact that the other two keep votes are anon. However, per the previous AfD, moving all this back to the main article would be a bit bloated. As much as I don't particularly find it interesting, it does seem to be mildly notable… VikÞor |  Talk 22:17, 19 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Can I just say that the fact that IPs are commenting reinforces this being a fan page? I like the videos, I have cleaned up Fred Figglehorn, and wrote Lucas Cruikshank, I just think that List of Fred characters doesn't meet Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, like an extended List of FRED episodes. 117Avenue (talk) 23:40, 19 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment. Why does it matter that IP addresses are commenting?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.45.109.14 (talk) 09:39, 23 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep. A redirect should include this content placed into the main "Fred Figglehorn" page but the previous redirect just had all of this content deleted.  Might be better to keep this page separate though as it's free from the goofy vandalism that affects the main Fred page.   FWIW I don't watch the show but have had to edit various Fred pages a few times to protect them from vandalism. 68.45.109.14 (talk) 09:45, 23 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete At the risk of being brusque: Listcruft trivia wankery. WP is not a list of things, and where lists are acceptable, there is a generally recognized logic or rationale for grouping things into a list. If we allow a "List of Fred characters" then we must allow a "List of Betty characters" and whatever else "List of X characters" comes after it. Again, no lists for lists' sake.Mtiffany71 (talk) 21:00, 24 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.


 * Relisting comment: Relisted because many of the arguments are not policy-based. Cunard (talk) 00:07, 26 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete almost entirely unsourced. Lists of characters are appropriate only in instances where there is enough content to warrant a separate article. If the one-shots were removed, the article would be far too short for a standalone. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Otters want attention) 00:23, 26 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete per TenPoundHammer. There is not enough content to warrant a separate article. Maybe a section in the main article? Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 01:27, 26 September 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.