Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Paige Michalchuk


 * 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. Given the complete absence of sources, I find the "keep" !votes not grounded in policy. For the same reason, a merge is not appropriate (we should not merge unsourced information). Randykitty (talk) 16:06, 28 November 2014 (UTC)

Paige Michalchuk

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Tons of plot detail, notability concerns, and completely unreferenced. Has been tagged for both of these since July 2009.  G loss  22:02, 7 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. NorthAmerica1000 01:42, 8 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. NorthAmerica1000 01:42, 8 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. NorthAmerica1000 01:42, 8 November 2014 (UTC)


 * Keep. The article needs to be cleaned up but AfD is not cleanup. Tchaliburton (talk) 14:28, 8 November 2014 (UTC)
 * They don't need to be cleaned up if they can't first establish notability. If you've found enough sources to accurately source and article about this character, by all means, share with me. But that doesn't seem to exist. Same situation as in Articles for deletion/Holly J. Sinclair, Articles for deletion/Peter Stone (Degrassi character), Articles for deletion/Sean Cameron all of which were deleted/redirected to the List of Degrassi: The Next Generation characters article.  G loss  16:42, 8 November 2014 (UTC)


 * Keep, easily found results among books and scholarly sources. Cheers, &mdash; Cirt (talk) 18:28, 8 November 2014 (UTC)
 * I'd greatly appreciate if you listed these books and sources here, as I'm unable to find any with useful information.  G loss  18:49, 8 November 2014 (UTC)


 * Keep, she's a prominent character in a prominent series. She has been discussed in the media but there are two dozen characters sometimes discussed only by first or last name. Paige is described using both at times or only one or the other. I don't understand the desire to delete these articles when this is not some fly-by-night pilot but a 4th series from a well-known franchise. Apple  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Apple byte (talk • contribs) 13:46, 9 November 2014 (UTC)
 * There are, in point of fact, very few TV shows which really need or warrant separate standalone articles about each individual character in them. All that's really warranted in most cases is a list of characters (and even that's cruft that's better described as "allowed" than actually "needed" per se.) Bearcat (talk) 22:35, 10 November 2014 (UTC)


 * Strong Keep needs cleanup not afd be bold instead Avono (talk) 14:07, 9 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Are you suggesting I should have cleaned the article up when I have concerns over the subjects notability? Because that doesn't make much sense at all.  G loss  16:59, 9 November 2014 (UTC)


 * well concerning fiction you are true that notability is difficult,but imho afd should have been used as a last resort instead,maybe something similar such as Article Rescue Squadron (Bobby Singer has it's own article for example). Avono (talk) 18:26, 9 November 2014 (UTC)


 * Television characters do not automatically qualify for separate standalone articles just because they exist — if you cannot add reliable sources which provide real-world context for why the character is a notable topic in an encyclopedia, then all they really warrant is inclusion in a list of characters. But that's not what this is — it's just an in-universe summary of plots she was involved in, which provides no demonstration whatsoever of why this belongs in an encyclopedia rather than a Degrassi fansite. Delete or merge into a character list unless real sources demonstrating real notability can actually be added. Bearcat (talk) 22:35, 10 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete as not notable unless anyone can find strong sources and clean up the article, which looks unlikely. If you remove all the plot summary content from the article (which is unsourced and not specifically relevant to the character), you're only left with the "relationships" section which is fandom material. Hustlecat do it! 20:35, 12 November 2014 (UTC)
 * As long as somebody sources this, then I would keep it. Bearian (talk) 22:37, 12 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete, everyone is saying that there are sources, but there's nothing in the article and nothing presented here. We should not be keeping unsourced articles around.  Lankiveil (speak to me) 22:15, 15 November 2014 (UTC).
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NorthAmerica1000 11:04, 18 November 2014 (UTC)


 * Merge not notable, but belongs in character list. Becky Sayles (talk) 07:18, 19 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete - This project requires reliable sources that discuss the subject matter in-depth, which appear to be non-existent for a 20-year-old tween drama. Tarc (talk) 17:47, 25 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete no evidence of notability--Mevagiss (talk) 12:15, 28 November 2014 (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.