Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Marita Covarrubias


 * 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. Eddie891 Talk Work 19:03, 12 January 2021 (UTC)

Marita Covarrubias

 * – ( View AfD View log )

WP:FANCRUFT this is an Encyclopedia not a Wikia fandom site. There is literally no reason to have an article here on this character. There is a reason we have a list of characters section. Delete this please. thank you. BTW this should be turned into a redirect to a List of X files characters. We can't have articles for every character on every show. This article should never have been created in the first place. IlluminatingTrooper (talk) 17:53, 5 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 18:10, 5 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. Toughpigs (talk) 19:12, 5 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Science fiction and fantasy-related deletion discussions. Toughpigs (talk) 19:12, 5 January 2021 (UTC)


 * Keep: Per WP:GNG, we have articles for characters that are covered by independent reliable sources. This article has worthwhile coverage from Cinefantastique, Entertainment Weekly and several published books examining The X-Files. There's a good Reception section in the article. This article is in a lot better shape than most; there's no reason to delete. – Toughpigs (talk) 18:59, 5 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep: I agree completely with Toughpigs. Daranios (talk) 19:43, 5 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep - Questionable nomination. Seems like a case of WP:IDONTLIKEIT.  Reading the nom, I expected to see what a lot of bad fictional character articles have: only in-universe info, no reception, no real-world info. Then looking at the article, I find a well-written well-sourced reception section based on real-world coverage.  It's even at Good Article status...  It is true that we don't need an article for every character on every show, but that does not mean we cannot have articles such as this when they meet WP:GNG.  -2pou (talk) 18:09, 7 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep: The nominator have not articulated why the sourcing of this article, or the potential availability of other reliable sources not used in this article, does not met the GNG requirement. 2pou is right about it coming across as WP:IDONTLIKEIT. Haleth (talk) 17:37, 8 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep the nominator doesn't cite policy. The article looks fine. There is a sourced reception section. Maybe some of those sources are short on detail but it's enough that it looks like a solid Wikipedia article. Even if he has a point that we have lists for more minor characters we should merge and not delete. Archrogue (talk) 19:44, 10 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep fan-popular does not mean fancruft. She was a recurring character on a top 10 TV show, and it's well-documented. Bearian (talk) 21:14, 11 January 2021 (UTC)


 * Keep Not any valid reasons given for AfD. This is just WP:IDONTLIKEIT. - The9Man  ( Talk ) 07:09, 12 January 2021 (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.