Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Great Dragon (Merlin)


 * 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   redirect to List_of_Merlin_characters.   A rbitrarily 0   ( talk ) 23:03, 6 June 2010 (UTC)

The Great Dragon (Merlin)

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

Contested proposed deletion. Non-notable minor character in a television program. No citations/references. Claritas § 14:30, 30 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 18:19, 30 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 18:19, 30 May 2010 (UTC)


 * Delete Really a minor character. The article cites no published sources which explain the dragon's importance to us. And really, although I know this is a decidedly minority position, all a TV show needs is one article.  If people are interested they will watch it and find out the details on their own. Kitfoxxe (talk) 19:02, 30 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment New editor, and the first time contribution is appreciated. As characters go, this one would probably be considered a recurring member of the cast, and actor John Hurt was selected to voice him, and the advice-giving character is usually pretty important in a series.  I won't say "keep", in that I think Wikipedia got out of hand with having articles about TV show characters, but I won't say delete either, since I don't really know how popular the Merlin (TV series) is.  Mandsford 19:04, 30 May 2010 (UTC)
 * I agree that the editor seems to be sincere in making a positive contribution. It's a bit unfair of me to use this space to bring this up, but I was just thinking what is Wikipedia going to look like 100 or 1,000 years from now?  Will there be a couple of hundred thousand articles on substantial topics and billions on every episode and character from every movie and TV show ever made? Kitfoxxe (talk) 19:08, 30 May 2010 (UTC)
 * More likely the former. I've only been here three years, Kitfoxxe, but it's a lot different of a place now than it was then in its nauseating WP:POKEMON days.  There used to be a lot more individual TV episode and TV character articles (even for minor characters who made one appearance on a show-- we recently had Articles for deletion/Lucas Hollingsworth as an example).  Even worse was that even the relatively fewer number of articles on substantial topics had idiotic pop culture references to The Simpsons and to Family Guy.  As Wikipedia went from being a joke to the first stop on the Google search, a lot of that changed.  When entertainment wikis came along, they provided a great place for the articles to migrate to.  Will there be a Wikipedia 100 or 1,000 years from now?  I'll be surprised, but it's one of the best things that ever happened for amateur writers like myself, so Jimmy Wales can have a donation every year when he asks me for one.  Mandsford 21:53, 30 May 2010 (UTC)


 * Keep This is a significant role for the major actor John Hurt with coverage and reviews in the New York Times, The Times, The Stage, Hollywood Reporter, &c. Of course, the coverage is usually set in the context of the overall production and so we might consider merger or other restructuring.  But that is just ordinary content editing with no need nor necessity for deletion.  Per our editing policy we should build upon this contribution rather than deleting it.  We might, for example, merge with List of Merlin characters which has lots of text but not one citation to back any of it up, unlike the article before us. Colonel Warden (talk) 09:57, 31 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Redirect to main article on TV series. Deb (talk) 11:59, 1 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Not really a plausible search term - is page history worth conserving ? Claritas § 12:02, 1 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Delete Already sufficiently covered at List_of_Merlin_characters per WP:NOT, so no merger needed. There is no non-trivial real-world information currently present to justify a WP:SPINOUT. Not a plausible title for redirection, except for a dab page, but then a new redirect can be created after deletion if necessary. – sgeureka t•c 12:32, 1 June 2010 (UTC)
 * redirect -- already covered adequately in the main article, which is more than a mere list. NOT PLOT, however, has nothing to do with it, as that policy only affects the overall coverage of a work of fiction--no more detailed wording has ever had consensus.  DGG ( talk ) 21:54, 1 June 2010 (UTC)
 * redirect: main article is fine. this needs something other than plot and should be merged in the meantime. Shooterwalker (talk) 06:10, 6 June 2010 (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.