Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mona McKay


 * 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   redirect to Shortland Street.  MBisanz  talk 03:09, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

Mona McKay

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

Fictional biography of a character introduced only 2 days ago (hence NO indication of significance or longevity is possible) with no real-world context or refrences. dramatic (talk) 04:04, 19 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of New Zealand-related deletion discussions.  dramatic (talk) 04:05, 19 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete: Fails | Google Test. TallNapoleon (talk) 05:42, 19 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Redirect to Shortland Street. Equendil Talk 08:03, 19 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Redirect to Shortland Street. The main article already has a lack of sources; there's no need to create unsourced breakaway articles violating WP:PLOT. Huon (talk) 09:07, 19 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Redirect to Shortland Street. Not enough information available to create a thorough article, isn't a main character and is probably going to leave shortly after this plot finishes.  Matt  (  Talk  )   10:29, 19 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment (to the above 3 contributions) I don't see the point in creating a redirect for every new character as they are introduced (several dozen a year) - the main article (if written in an encyclopedic manner, which Shortland Street most definitely is not) will not mention the names of newly introduced characters. dramatic (talk) 10:34, 19 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions.   --  treelo  radda  15:32, 19 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fictional characters-related deletion discussions.   --  treelo  radda  15:32, 19 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Redirect for now; can be expanded if becomes more significant. No reason why a redirect is inappropriate, so it could have been done without coming here. DGG (talk) 01:04, 20 September 2008 (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.