Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Slater family


 * 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. Redirects at editorial discretion; the sole !keep vote does not address the notability concerns Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 09:10, 4 June 2017 (UTC)

Slater family

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Has been uncited for over 4 years. No indication this particular term Slater Family meets WP:GNG.  Onel 5969  TT me 14:26, 26 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions.  WC  Quidditch   &#9742;   &#9998;  20:39, 26 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions.  WC  Quidditch   &#9742;   &#9998;  20:39, 26 May 2017 (UTC)


 * Delete. Just plot summary. Fails GNG. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 07:28, 30 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Redirect to Charlie Slater as a potential valid search term (plus it already has links to it and there is potential for it to be a properly sourced article in the future). Article is just plot summary. Note that the article hasn't been uncited for four years - it has been a redirect for most of its time. The article was created on 1 May 2013 but was purely plot summary so was redirected. It stayed that way from 2 May 2013‎ to 19 March 2015‎. Its recreation was purely plot summary so it was then a redirect again from 14 April 2015‎ to 21 May 2017‎. The current version is not an improvement on either of its previous incarnations. — anemone  projectors — 11:14, 30 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep. The redirect to Charlie Slater was idiotic. Nobody can disagree with that. This pages gives information to the family connections of the whole of the Slater family - Charlie's page does not. TazminDaytime (talk) 16:02, 30 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Can you explain how the article meets WP:GNG? — anemone projectors — 18:04, 30 May 2017 (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.