Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Serena van der Woodsen (2nd nomination)


 * 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 keep. (non-admin closure) SST flyer 05:21, 18 April 2016 (UTC)

Serena van der Woodsen
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

This fictional has no WP:RS reliable sources which WP:V its general notability per the WP:GNG and WP:NFICT. Thus this subject is an unsuitable topic for a standalone article. Most sources appear to stay within the realm of WP:TRIVIALMENTION, as they discuss the show or the actress portraying this character. AadaamS (talk) 21:33, 3 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep This article has a significant number of reliable sources and given that the charactor is the "central charactor" I think it is suitable for a standalone article. &mdash; Music1201  talk  23:33, 3 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions.  SwisterTwister   talk  04:45, 5 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions.  SwisterTwister   talk  04:45, 5 April 2016 (UTC)


 * Keep perhaps also since it seems convincing enough for an article, even if only a televised character. SwisterTwister   talk  04:45, 5 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 03:14, 9 April 2016 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Comment specifically, no source demonstrates that this character has any notability independent from the show. AadaamS (talk) 07:26, 9 April 2016 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  MBisanz  talk 00:20, 11 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep. Unless I'm misunderstanding something, the reasons proposed for deletion would apply to any fictional character, and there are thousands of them on Wikipedia. Why is this article uniquely irrelevant? Bradv  18:59, 11 April 2016 (UTC)
 * These reasons do apply to every fictional character but some characters are simply too notable for their articles to be deleted. Those characters have had books and articles full of analysis written about the characters or the impact of these characters on later work. A counter example would be this analysis of Sherlock Holmes. If you find 2-3 similar sources for the analysis of Serena vdW you will have proven that this character is notable enough to have a standalone article. AadaamS (talk) 19:46, 11 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep - agree with above. Fictional characters can still be notable. DaltonCastle (talk) 01:39, 15 April 2016 (UTC)
 * They can only ever be notable in the WP:GNG sense if reliable sources verify that the character is notable. Most sources I checked only amount to WP:TRIVIALMENTION as they prove the notability of Blake Lively, but not the character itself. AadaamS (talk) 18:03, 15 April 2016 (UTC)


 * Keep, for reasons already stated above. Perhaps improving the article would be a better path than deleting it all together. Brocicle (talk) 15:09, 15 April 2016 (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.