Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Roger (American Dad!)


 * 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 procedural keep. This is one of several nominations made by an editor who has been previously cautioned about opening merge proposals before making AfDs for character pages. (26 nominations in all.) This is something that falls under the banner of cleanup rather than outright deletion, so this is going to be best handled by a merge discussion at Talk:List_of_American_Dad!_characters. This is going to be a lump close, so this same message will also appear on the other pages. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)  12:09, 19 December 2015 (UTC)

Roger Smith (American Dad!)
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Little real-world coverage. Almost everything is unsourced or sourced only from the episodes. WP:FANCRUFT. DJ Autagirl (talk) 18:24, 18 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:23, 18 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:23, 18 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Comics and animation-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:23, 18 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:23, 18 December 2015 (UTC)


 * Delete no independent notability separate from American Dad!, lack of independent coverage, certainly no significant coverage. There is no specific guideline for fictional characters, so the WP:GNG applies. There may be some collateral help from WP:NBOOK which has a section on derivative articles which says: While a book may be notable, it is not normally advisable to have a separate article on a character or thing from the book, and it is often the case that despite the book being manifestly notable, a derivative article from it is not. Exceptions do exist, especially in the case of very famous books. For example, Charles Dickens' "A Christmas Carol" clearly warrants a 'subarticle' on its protagonist, Ebenezer Scrooge. --Bejnar (talk) 06:00, 19 December 2015 (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.