Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Paula (character)


 * 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. Mr.Z-man 17:35, 7 November 2008 (UTC)

Paula (character)

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

This character does not establish notability independent of its series through the inclusion of real world information from reliable, third party sources. Most of the information is made up of original research and unnecessary plot details. There is no current assertion for future improvement. TTN (talk) 15:36, 2 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep - The Larry Sanders show didn't achieve spectacular ratings, but was well known within the industry that it lampooned, and is a landmark in situation comedy. I don't believe that the inclusion of an article on Paula hurts wikipedia at all, though I do think the title should be shifted to Paula (The Larry Sanders Show). - Richard Cavell (talk) 15:50, 2 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Characters require some sort of real world impact detailed by reliable sources to have articles. The fact that it does no harm to have an article is of little consequence. The character can adequately be described in the main article, while the episode list can take care of any separate appearances. TTN (talk) 16:20, 2 November 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete per nom, along with all the other Secondary Characters listed in the template. Next to zero chance of any third party notice for any of them. The show was exceptional, but notability is not inherited. Clarityfiend (talk) 00:08, 3 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep Gnews turns up a lot, but all of it behind a pay wall. A book search turns up a lot more .  Looking over the books and gnews hits, I think there are enough RS with which to build an article.  Going to be hard with that paywall though.  Hobit (talk) 02:36, 3 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep on the basis of Hobit's references. I note that there is no requirement at all for online material to be free--we do however need to get enoughof an exceprt to show that its more than a passing mention. DGG (talk) 18:19, 4 November 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.