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


 * 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. But sort of a no consensus that appeared by comments from the community to be trending in the direction of a keep. -- Cirt (talk) 08:01, 12 October 2010 (UTC)

List of characters in Red Dead Redemption

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

Characters have no independent notability from the game. Listing the entire cast would violate WP:GAMEGUIDE. PROD was declined, so I'm bringing this to AfD. Additionally article would need major copy edits to bring it out of universe, clean up grammar, and provide any sort of sourcing (though these are secondary issues). The only character that might be notable enough for the article is John Marston (Red Dead Redemption) (which could possibly have his own, but that's for another discussion). There just isn't enough coverage for a list of characters to pass WP:GNG, and Red Dead Redemption revolves only around Marston and is presented find currently without a list of characters, as any notable ones are presented throughout the plot. Teancum (talk) 11:49, 4 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Speedy delete as it was created by a banned user in violation of the ban. Nymf hideliho! 20:55, 4 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Merge to Red Dead Redemption. There have been edits since creation by non-banned users, in good faith, so I don't think the speedy applies as such. That said, I don't see why a section of the main article couldn't list the characters and their voice actors (if any - never played this game). The main article is not overly long, so there's room to add characters without forking the article. Much of this content would, of course, be pruned down, and I don't think that's a bad thing. UltraExactZZ Said~ Did 12:19, 5 October 2010 (UTC)
 * I again want to point out that the plot mentions and introduces all important characters. I don't know if that changes your thoughts, but it seems superfluous to me to have a character list/section, particularly for those important enough to be part of the plot. --Teancum (talk) 14:16, 5 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 18:15, 5 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 18:15, 5 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep This article was created by a now banned sockpuppet whose other article contributions were reverted, apparently he adding false information.  So the article needs to be proofread by someone who knows the series.  The article's subject is clearly notable though, as a quick Google news search does reveal.
 * Network World states My favorite part of the game, surprisingly, is the voice acting, the well-written characters, and the storyline. John Marston is a complicated character, having been a bad person who is trying to make things right. The other characters in the game who give quests are equally as complex, such as the female rancher who initially saves Marston, to the marshall in Armadillo who can only do so much against the lawlessness going on around him. There’s dozens of other crazy characters you meet in this game, and some of the most entertaining portions are listening to the conversations between these characters when you’re riding off towards the next mission location.

And there are others. Working on the article now, and tagging it for Rescue.  D r e a m Focus  20:16, 6 October 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm not really following how the entire list of characters has even remotely enough significant coverage. If you're thinking Marston on his own might, I could definitely see that, but you'll be very hard pressed to find any reliable info whatsoever on the rest of the characters, let alone significant coverage. If anything John Marston (Red Dead Redemption) could be created, as I stated before.  If you're wanting to work on something that can actually come out of this, that's where I would focus. Whether it was created by a banned user doesn't have much bearing on why it was brought to AfD. --Teancum (talk) 20:56, 6 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Did you read ALL of what I wrote, not just the first couple of sentences? The quote is about the characters in the game, it saying others are equally as interesting, and listening to their conversations the best part of the game.  Many major games have character list articles.   D r e a m Focus  04:39, 7 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Yes, I read it all, but that quote is very vague, mentioning simply "other characters" - not Jack Marston, not Bill Williamson, not Bonnie McFarlaine. Again this is easily covered in a John Maston article with a section describing his interactions.  This is different from Articles for deletion/List of Star Control races, where at least more than one race has coverage.  No sources I've ever found do much more than list a secondary character's name if they're mentioned at all.  Usually it mentions Marston's interactions with other characters, and not other character's roles in the game.  Big difference. Let me be clear though - even though I don't see this list as passing WP:GNG, Marston himself would, and I'm all for an article on him as an individual, but a list of characters article when only one has received significant coverage is trying to dodge a bullet. Saying that other games have articles is simply WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS.  Feel free to bring those to AfD if you want to, but their inclusion is irrelevant here.  Additionally, if the article is going to be rescued, it needs to be sourced.  Finding sources here is nice, but implementing them into the article (and doing some major copy edits since this is clearly just a translated version from the Spanish Wikipedia) are what will make the article notable. --Teancum (talk) 13:41, 7 October 2010 (UTC)

Comment - This is all covered at the Red Dead Wikia, which may end up being a more appropriate venue for this information. Snotty Wong  squeal 22:22, 6 October 2010 (UTC)
 * If they allowed us to simply place a redirect from Wikipedia straight there, I'd agree. Just because information fits in more than one place, doesn't mean it shouldn't be here.  Otherwise we'd just erase all the history and science articles, and tell people to go get a textbook.   D r e a m Focus  04:39, 7 October 2010 (UTC)
 * You're missing the point though - those sorts of articles either have, or are likely to have, significant coverage from reliable sources. This one is not.  If it had coverage for the entire cast, or even a few of the main characters that would be enough, but you'll only find sources on John Marston, which is enough to create an article on him, but not enough to carry the weight of the entire cast.  In fact it seems like we'd be trying to go around the standards and rules, trying to justify an article on several individuals stating that not everyone needs to be notable.  That might be true, but when the only character with coverage has a decent amount of coverage, its best just to create an article on that character. --06:43, 7 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Delete - Characters relevant to the plot belong in the plot synopsis of the game's article. Critical reception of the characters, if exemplified in the quote above, is brief enough to be covered in the reception section of the game's article. I see no reliable coverage specific to the characters that is significant enough to justify a seperate article. Marasmusine (talk) 17:31, 10 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of video game related deletion discussions.  Marasmusine (talk) 17:35, 10 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep the individual parts of a combination do not have to be notable--if they were, we'd be able to justify articles on each; the alternative is to merge the entire contents into the main article, not just a mere list of characters. How we divide up material about an overall notable subject is not affected by WP:GNG; WP:N is explicit that it does not refer to article content.  As consensus is clear that  a discussion of the characters in a work of fiction is appropriate,   they have to be covered somehow.  NOT GAMEGUIDE only prohibits detail which would be useful only to those actually playing the game, not just reading about it. I do not see it here.    DGG ( talk ) 04:19, 11 October 2010 (UTC)
 * I agree that Notability isn't an issue, if one treats this as an extension of the main article. However, WP:WAF applies - this is excessive plot information. Marasmusine (talk) 11:35, 11 October 2010 (UTC)
 * You're also over-generalizing it. One character is notable.  That doesn't hold the whole article up, particularly if that character is better served with their own article.  Also as noted above the characters all have plenty of mention in the game's plot to cover the major players without becoming a WP:WAF violation. --Teancum (talk) 11:56, 11 October 2010 (UTC)

 Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Spartaz Humbug! 06:18, 12 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Keep - This is a hard one as I would normally have said to merge it into the main article. Although the article has some in-universe issues, that can be fixed.  The information, I feel, is worthy of inclusion in some way.  So I default to Keep. - Pmedema (talk) 06:49, 12 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep It is a long list so I wouldn't merge it to the main article if it's going to take up article space. Deletion? Maybe not. Some of the characters have notability, including references from the New York Times & Network World. See here . Minima  c  ( talk ) 07:04, 12 October 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.