Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mary Corleone


 * 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. Closing in this manner as no technical notability has been established during this discussion, but on the other hand there has been no clear consensus made to delete the article. &mdash; Coffee //  have a cup  //  beans  // 02:17, 10 December 2013 (UTC)

Mary Corleone

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

This character does not meet the notability guidelines for fictional characters. The article's content is mostly a rehash of the film plot, but no secondary sources showing that the character is notable independent of the film. --- The Old Jacobite The '45  15:55, 30 November 2013 (UTC)

I am also nominating the following related pages for the same reasons given above:


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:29, 30 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:29, 30 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:29, 30 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:30, 30 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:29, 30 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:29, 30 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:29, 30 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:30, 30 November 2013 (UTC)


 * Redirect to Corleone family. I looked at these a few weeks back when I nominated Articles for deletion/Apollonia Vitelli-Corleone. But I didn't have the heart to delete the others because the Corleone family are central in multiple books and movies. On the other hand, the nom is correct there is lack of secondary sourcing. And the Godfather Wikia does it better so nothing is lost for fans. I thought about a project to merge the dozens of Godfather character articles into a List of Godfather characters, but that is very difficult due to length and integration problems, and which to merge and which to leave separate. So if the decision has to be made right now recommend a redirect, and perhaps an external link to Wikia (from the Corleone family article) using Template:Wikia. -- Green Cardamom (talk) 20:55, 30 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep all The nomination seems quite absurd because these characters covered in great detail in numerous works. For example, checking out Kay Adams, I was immediately able to find a source which discussed the casting of this part in detail.  The nomination seems to be just addressing the current state of the articles without following our editing or deletion policies. Warden (talk) 21:45, 30 November 2013 (UTC)
 * You have given one example of a source for one of the articles I have nominated. Nothing that you have said gives any indication that all of these articles can be salvaged.  Kay Adams is the only one I considered somewhat borderline.  The others are not notable beyond the films. --- The Old Jacobite The '45  23:17, 30 November 2013 (UTC)
 * It seems adequate to demonstrate that your bundle is poorly chosen and that you have not observed WP:BEFORE. Warden (talk) 17:02, 2 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Redirect all to Corleone family. They are not notable.  One source found for one article doesn't convince me otherwise.  Deletion is also acceptable as a fallback. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 15:45, 1 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep all I am reasonably sure that a properly conducted search could find enough material on most of them, but I unfortunately cannot do everything & if I do it, will not get to it during this discussion. I continue to regret the foolishness of trying to downgrade our coverage of all important elements of important fiction; this is moving in the wrong direction entirely. It would be much more helpful to look for good content and references than to remove the articles for temporary lack of them. (I accept that we might choose to group them together,   The content is more important than the arrangement, and grouping does reduce the need for duplication of background.)  DGG ( talk ) 07:08, 2 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Sadly, when many topics are placed together in a group deletion, the AFD template only shows the search engine for the one "head" topic. Here are the others:
 * Time now to research for sources offering contextual analysis and commentary of these characters.  Schmidt,  Michael Q. 10:03, 2 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Time now to research for sources offering contextual analysis and commentary of these characters.  Schmidt,  Michael Q. 10:03, 2 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Time now to research for sources offering contextual analysis and commentary of these characters.  Schmidt,  Michael Q. 10:03, 2 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Time now to research for sources offering contextual analysis and commentary of these characters.  Schmidt,  Michael Q. 10:03, 2 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Time now to research for sources offering contextual analysis and commentary of these characters.  Schmidt,  Michael Q. 10:03, 2 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Keep ALL five. I find myself in complete agreement with User:DGG on this one, and like him do not have the time to personally address issues in this instance. But for a notable fictional family whose members have been analyzed and dissected ad infinitum in numerous sources, it neeeding to be done is no reason to delete improvable topics. See below:
 * Keep Mary Corleone and encourage article be improved through available sources.
 * Keep Mary Corleone and encourage article be improved through available sources.
 * Keep Anthony Corleone and encourage article be improved through available sources.
 * Keep Carmela Corleone and encourage article be improved through available sources.
 * Keep Vincent Corleone and encourage article be improved through available sources.
 * Keep Kay Adams-Corleone and encourage article be improved through available sources.
 * Point here is that we can give this some time and discuss possible merges on the various talk pages. Deletion is the last resort for only that which is completely unsalvageable.  Schmidt,  Michael Q. 10:30, 2 December 2013 (UTC)
 * User:MQS: Anything on Apollonia Vitelli-Corleone, previously deleted? I'll try to look also.  DGG ( talk ) 15:51, 2 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Sorry DGG, there's not enough in sources for me to determine reasonableness for a separate article for Apollonia Vitelli-Corleone.  Schmidt,  Michael Q. 22:18, 2 December 2013 (UTC)
 * I just did a quick look at the sources and mostly about the movie actors, not the characters. They are passing mentions of the characters. --Green Cardamom (talk) 18:36, 2 December 2013 (UTC)
 * No source is required to be 100% about a fictional character, just so long as they are discussed in enough detail. If covered in relationship to other characters and the various films, we have enough to allow a separate article.  Schmidt,  Michael Q. 22:18, 2 December 2013 (UTC)
 * They don't have to be solely dedicated to the character, but they do need to provide some sort of content for the article. The grand majority of these seem to mention the characters in context only to their role in the plot, so there isn't really much that can be done with them. The only thing I've seen so far is some casting issues for Mary, but that is already discussed in the film article. TTN (talk) 22:29, 2 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Yeah need information to write an encyclopedia article with per WP:WHYN, beyond database type facts of what actor played what character. -- Green Cardamom (talk) 22:35, 2 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Redirect to Corleone family and allow them to be split out as necessary pending actual real world information being added to them. Offering laundry lists of sources doesn't really help anything. Looking through a few of them, the grand majority seem like passing mentions. There is some stuff about Sofia Coppola's casting, but it already appears to covered in The Godfather Part III anyway. TTN (talk) 16:06, 2 December 2013 (UTC)
 * The Corleone family article is about the Mafia crime family and so would be quite inappropriate for the characters listed here, who were more conventional family members. Conflating the two would encourage  improper synthesis and we have no sources provided to suggest that this is an appropriate treatment.  Per WP:COMMONNAME, a character is best described using that character's name, not some synthetic construct fabricated as a form of faux deletion. Warden (talk) 16:59, 2 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Agreed. A redirect and then allowing a split-out seems redundant for what already exists... and such a loss of sourcable commentary and analysis does not expand a reader's knowledge of the subject (expanding knowledge, not limiting it, is why Wikipedia is here, after all). Second point: a merge would overwhelm the suggested target... which is essentially a description of some few family activities and a blue-linked list of family members. The Corleone family article lacks any decent commentary about those family members. Redirecting/deleting sourcable articles ON those family members (changing blue-links to red) does not expand a reader's knowledge on those topics.  Schmidt,  Michael Q. 22:18, 2 December 2013 (UTC)
 * If these can be sourced with development and reception information, they should be kept, but you seem to be basing this off of random searches without actually providing anything. These are all simply plot dumps, so nothing needs to be merged anyway. If Corleone family is the contention point, creating a list of characters is also suitable. TTN (talk) 22:29, 2 December 2013 (UTC)
 * A Catch 22. An editor not having time to fix a problem perceived by some as fixable, does not in and of itself lend credulity to statements of non-notability. Numerous book sources analyzing the various family members and their relationships allows me to reasonably presume it can be done, even if not immediately.  WP:WIP, WP:DEADLINE. WP:IMPERFECT. 03:17, 3 December 2013 (UTC)
 * The thing is, as pointed out above, all you've given are general links to searches without actually showing anything. I certainly didn't go through all of them link-by-link, but the ones I did see don't have anything beyond the bit about people hating Coppola's daughter. If there are "numerous books", pointing out a few would help your case. TTN (talk) 03:45, 3 December 2013 (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.