Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Red Dead Redemption characters


 * 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.  Sandstein  10:23, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

List of Red Dead Redemption characters

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

I've recently tried to this article as much as possible, and in doing so have confirmed that it does not have enough sources to demonstrate notability. Only 6 of the 24 sections within the article have any commentary on the characters' development (mostly only one or two sentences)—the other 18 sections consist entirely of plot information, violating WP:VGSCOPE #5 and #6. Most of the necessary information is already included in Development of Red Dead Redemption. A similar nomination last month led to redirects to the relevant article (in this case, Red Dead Redemption), which is always an option, but honestly I think deletion here is justified. – Rhain  ☔ 06:30, 4 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Video games-related deletion discussions. –  Rhain  ☔ 06:30, 4 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. –  Rhain  ☔ 06:30, 4 May 2020 (UTC)


 * Delete per nom. IceWelder  &#91; &#9993; &#93; 06:35, 4 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. ~ Dissident93 (talk) 07:29, 4 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep Easily passes WP:LISTN. For example, see
 * The Evolution Of Characters From RDR1 To RDR2
 * The Gang's All Here
 * Red Dead Redemption Story And Character Recap
 * Red Dead Redemption 2: What Happened To Every Character
 * Red Dead Redemption 2 Reveals Its Criminal Cast of Characters
 * and many more. Policies which indicate that we should not delete include WP:ATD; WP:NOTPAPER and WP:PRESERVE. Andrew🐉(talk) 12:57, 4 May 2020 (UTC)
 * I don't think any of those sources demonstrate notability per WP:LISTN. The first two sources are just lists of characters in this game who returned for the prequel. The third source is literally just a story recap. The final two are not written about this game. And all of these sources are written in the context of Red Dead Redemption 2, not this game; the characters do not inherit notability. Not to mention that the sources could only be used to cite story elements (i.e. WP:GAMECRUFT), not development and reception information. I'd also argue that WP:PRESERVE is not a relevant policy here since, as mentioned in the nomination, I've made attempts to expand the article as much as possible. – Rhain  ☔ 14:38, 4 May 2020 (UTC)
 * The nominator seems to be suggesting that it's ok to have List of Red Dead Redemption 2 characters but not this similar list. That's silly because the one key point of the sources is that there's overlap between the two.  And policies such as WP:PRESERVE certainly do apply whereas WP:GAMECRUFT is junk – merely an opinionated essay.  My !vote stands. Andrew🐉(talk) 15:51, 4 May 2020 (UTC)
 * List of Red Dead Redemption characters and List of Red Dead Redemption 2 characters are vastly different lists. The former consists almost entirely of rehashing the plot from different perspectives, whereas the latter has detailed (and sourced) information regarding the development and reception of the game's main characters. There certainly isn't overlap between the two lots of sources, firstly because the games only share a handful of characters, and secondly because the characters do not inherit notability. Red Dead Redemption's character list must demonstrate notability in its own right. I personally don't think WP:PRESERVE applies here anymore, since I've already tried to fix the problem. And I recommend you take another look at WP:GAMECRUFT: it is not "merely an opinionated essay", it is a guideline that is part of the English Wikipedia's Manual of Style. – Rhain  ☔ 16:59, 4 May 2020 (UTC)


 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. –LaundryPizza03 ( d  c̄ ) 13:26, 4 May 2020 (UTC)


 * Delete, sourcing provided above only contributed to notability for the second game, this list does not pass LISTN per NOTINHERITED. The article also fails WP:PLOT, since it is written from an entirely in-universe point of view. Devonian Wombat (talk) 23:38, 4 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. Nika2020 (talk) 19:26, 5 May 2020 (UTC)
 * KEEP References have been found. Reliable sources give significant coverage to this, so it passes the general notability guidelines.  It doesn't have to be considered a list article, you could remove the "list of" from the title, and it'd still be notable just any regular article based on passing the GNG.   D r e a m Focus  23:43, 5 May 2020 (UTC)
 * I'm yet to see these references that have been found. I've as much as I can, but it still fails to pass notability guidelines. The article is just a massive retelling of the game's plot. –  Rhain  ☔ 00:30, 6 May 2020 (UTC)
 * There are references in the article. I was mostly referring to the coverage Andrew🐉 found and posted above.  Did you click any of those links?   D r e a m Focus  05:54, 6 May 2020 (UTC)
 * I'm aware of the references in the article, as, but only five are used outside of the opening two sections (which are copied from elsewhere anyway). Yes, I did click Andrew's links; did you read any of my responses? All of the sources only contribute notability to the second game, not this one: the first two sources are lists of characters who returned for the prequel, the third is just a story recap, and the last two aren't even relevant to this game. And none of them would change the fact that the article is just a massive retelling of the game's plot. – Rhain  ☔ 06:42, 6 May 2020 (UTC)
 * https://www.thegamer.com/evolution-characters-red-dead-redemption-2/ shows information about 10 characters from this game that were also in the sequel. That's significant coverage in a reliable source about the contents of this article.  Other articles do also give information about the characters found in this game.   D r e a m Focus  07:15, 6 May 2020 (UTC)
 * I know, but that article only demonstrates notability in context of the second game. It's also not very "significant coverage", nor is it considered a reliable source. If you have found other articles that give enough information to warrant notability, please feel free to share, but in its current state, the article currently consists of WP:GAMECRUFT. If all of the excessive plot information was removed, the article would consist of 400 words, 300 of which are copied from Development of Red Dead Redemption. The remaining 100 words can be moved across. – Rhain  ☔ 08:17, 6 May 2020 (UTC)
 * It shows information of the characters in the first game also. That much written about each character is in fact quite "significant coverage".  Also thegamer meets all requirements for a reliable source, it just hasn't been discussed and added yet.  I have started a discussion about it at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Video_games/Sources. And this isn't a merge discussion its a deletion discussion.   D r e a m Focus  13:51, 6 May 2020 (UTC)
 * I know, but the whole article only exists in the context of the second game, not the notability of the first game’s characters—they do not inherit notability. I appreciate you starting the discussion, but even if the site is deemed reliable, it’s still only one source. And what will it be used to cite? The fact that John Marston returned in Red Dead Redemption 2? – Rhain  ☔ 14:14, 6 May 2020 (UTC)


 * Delete or merge: Maybe the characters from the second game are notable, but that doesn't transfer to the first game's characters. A lot of these sources are only talking about them in the context of the second game. It's normal for some games to experience a breakthrough on their sequel, and with it the characters. As a suggestion, you could write a short section about the non-notable story elements in the first game, and have that section link to the more notable story elements from the second game. Shooterwalker (talk) 20:32, 7 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment I was able to find this coverage on the topic:, , , , , , . There is also the offical guide which may help with sourcing which can be seen here . There is probably more coverage to be found in print magazines considering the game was released in 2010. Regards  Spy-cicle💥   Talk? 14:47, 8 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Same problems as with Andrew's sources above. #2, #4, #5 are articles about carryovers from RDR to RDR2, of which #2 is based on then-rumours; #1, #3, #8 are in-universe summaries; #6 is reception, in which characters are just lightly discussed; and #7 is an unrelated analysis. The same arguments from above apply; the sources given for this game are insufficient to retain a separate list of this kind. This is different from the list about RDR2's characters, as it includes, among many other things, plenty of development content. IceWelder  &#91; &#9993; &#93; 19:04, 8 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Redirect to Red Dead Redemption The above sources do provide some notability (even if some are about characters returning in the prequel) but not enough for a standalone list. Redirects are cheap there is no inherrant disadvantage to having one and if in the future someone is able to find in-depth coverage of these characters (in old print magazine or retrospectives) it can be put back into mainspace., Would you considering changing your !votes to redirects as opposed to outright deletion? Regards   Spy-cicle💥   Talk? 14:02, 11 May 2020 (UTC)
 * This game came out nearly 10 years ago (and I mean, its 10-year anniversary is next week!) so I doubt that if the sourcing hasn't existed for the past decade, it's then suddenly going to appear somewhere in the future. Having said that, I won't change my vote per se, but I'm not opposed to a redirect page at all. —  CR 4 ZE (T &bull; C)  14:11, 11 May 2020 (UTC)
 * I'd rather not. From my experience, articles of this origin are often the target of anonymous users that continuously re-create the list, claiming that it was "valuable Wiki-content", although it is clearly not. This is results in unnecessary standoffs between IPs and maintainers (as was the case several times for a lists of radio stations in various GTA games). By default, therefore, I favour deletion, so that, if required, a clean, historyless redirect could be created thereafter. That said, I am not opposed to having a redirect in general, but I wouldn't change my vote just to keep the current history. Also note that the main Red Dead Redemption articles does not include a list of characters, making a redirect by that name misleading. IceWelder  &#91; &#9993; &#93; 14:22, 11 May 2020 (UTC)
 * A good point about redirect pages, . I'll advocate for that at my current GTA V characters AFD if consensus moves towards a redirect there as well. —  CR 4 ZE (T &bull; C)  14:26, 11 May 2020 (UTC)
 * I agree. This is actually the reason I've not suggested redirection; if the redirect exists, a new or IP editor is bound to come along and recreate the list entirely of plot summaries. I wasn't entirely happy with how the GTA characters AfD went this way, because if the sourcing still doesn't exist for 15–19 year old games, it almost certainly never will. I think the same applies here. If new sources pop up, they can be added to the game page and/or development article. – Rhain  ☔ 23:53, 11 May 2020 (UTC)


 * Delete: I've pondered this for a while and was even entertaining the idea of a new article, List of Red Dead characters, and merging both this and List of Red Dead Redemption 2 characters together. However, it's clear as has stated above that they are very different lists, and there's no notable content here that couldn't very easily be integrated in the Red Dead Redemption or John Marston articles—of which, any such content already has been. The sourcing—even that provided by  and  above—simply doesn't exist for this article to stand on its own two feet; if it was anywhere near the quality of the RDR2 characters article, my opinion would be very different. —  CR 4 ZE  (T &bull; C)  13:42, 11 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete, given Rhain's editing history and focus, I have no doubt when they say that sources are lacking and do not establish notability. If they were there, this would be at FLC already. Axem Titanium (talk) 16:25, 11 May 2020 (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.