Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Steve Harrington (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. Tone 15:55, 14 October 2019 (UTC)

Steve Harrington
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Another fictional character, while in an outstanding series, with zero real world notability.  Onel 5969  TT me 00:56, 22 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions.  Onel 5969  TT me 00:56, 22 September 2019 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Delete - There is already a section on characters on the Stranger Things page, with a short blurb on the character. Outside of some fairly irregular circumstances, characters are not notable, even when the works they appear in or the creators controlling them are. ZBM-2 (talk) 10:09, 22 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep The topic was discussed and kept just last month and the nomination fails to address any of the points made so recently. See WP:BEFORE and WP:DELAFD, "''It can be disruptive to repeatedly nominate a page in the hope of getting a different outcome." Andrew D. (talk) 19:12, 22 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep per Andrew D. I see no new argument, and consensus at the last AFD that the article meets the criteria at both WP:SIGCOV and WP:GNG is still accurate.4meter4 (talk) 17:40, 29 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Redirect unless there are more sources. The ones in the article are certainly good building blocks, but they're not enough to hold an entire article. It feels like too much weight is being put on them currently. TTN (talk) 18:09, 29 September 2019 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 13:47, 30 September 2019 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Updated to keep below Move to Draft since this is clearly still being worked on.  Then use the aforementioned redirect in its place with the proper Rcat with possibilities pointing to the draft. Deletion is not always the answer.  I'm a little surprised there's a second AfD in just a month...  Improving Wikipedia articles should not be expected to happen quickly...  This is not a job.  -2pou (talk) 19:06, 2 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep No new argument, and clear consensus at the last AFD that the article meets WP:GNG. Wm335td (talk) 19:43, 2 October 2019 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 10:00, 7 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep - References already cited in the article show that it meets WP:GNG. No plausible merge/redirect apparent or suggested. Actually, no legitimate WP:DELREASON cited above either - the nearest is the suggestion that this is duplication, but explanation of why it is better covered there rather than in this article. FOARP (talk) 19:32, 7 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep I don't see Notability as an issue here. Three reference articles already listed (Vanity Fair, The Hollywood Reporter, Men's Health) are all specifically about the character himself more than about the show.  He's also discussed in an essay in the book Uncovering Stranger Things: Essays on Eighties Nostalgia, Cynicism and Innocence in the Series, and he also has a whole page of discussion in Netflix Nostalgia: Streaming the Past on Demand which also references Vulture and Buzzfeed articles about him (Buzzfeed is a little weak). Trying to find those, Vulture also has a number of other articles on him:, , even about his hair.  Talking about a fictional character's hair is something I haven't seen since "The Rachel", and it's not just Vulture, People The Wrap and potentially more.   Do I think an article is necessary?  I'm not sure, but the argument for deletion was notability, and that does not hold up. -2pou (talk) 17:46, 9 October 2019 (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.