Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Thelma Harper


 * 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. John254 01:06, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

Thelma Harper

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Written completely in-universe (going against WP:WAF), and the subject lacks sufficient outside commentary to improve it. CrazyLegsKC 11:22, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

Also nominated for deletion are the following Mama's Family-related articles. They are all written predominantly or completely in an in-universe style and lack sufficient outside commentary to improve them to Wikipedia standards.


 * Keep all per WP:FICT major characters from works of fiction can have their own articles. Most of the names on the list I recognize as major characters from the series. Any that aren't major should be merged into a list article. Otto4711 13:00, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Strong Keep for all --Philip Laurence 13:42, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep all main characters on a notable, highly rated show. Could use some cleanup though.  Specifying "Species: Human" in the infobox is a little silly. Andrew Lenahan -  St ar bli nd  15:19, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment - I agree that these characters (most of them, anyway) are notable; however, like I said above, I believe that they lack the kind of outside sources and commentary that would be necessary to write a good, out-of-universe article about fiction, in keeping with Wikipedia standards (WP:WAF)&mdash;which is the whole reason I nominated them. I personally am a fan of the show, and have seen very little, if any, of this kind of source material that could be used for articles on these characters, so I don't believe they could grow and improve beyond the simple in-universe "biographies" that they are now (with the possible exception of Thelma Harper herself).  If anybody does think that they should be kept, I think they should also suggest possible sources and ways they could be improved to meet WP standards, because I don't see any. --CrazyLegsKC 15:48, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
 * I disagree. Sources are out there if you look for them.  In just a few seconds I found this, this, and this, and that was without even bothering to dig into the archived stories from when when the show was actually on.  Andrew Lenahan -  St ar bli nd  16:37, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Those are good sources, but they're all about the character of Mama, and they're all related to Vicki Lawrence's Two-Woman Show. I had a feeling there might be some stuff about that, which is why I noted Mama herself as a "possible exception" above. Are there any other sources for the other major characters, much less the minor characters (such as Buzz and the Mayor), or for Raytown, the show's setting&mdash;perhaps in the "archived stories" that you mentioned? If there are, so be it, but I still feel it's going to be very difficult to find whatever sources there may be and write them into good, beefed-up articles, especially for the more minor characters.  --CrazyLegsKC 18:41, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep all as major characters of a highly notable series. All of these articles are in desperate need of rework - none have sources and all need rewrites per WP:WAF but their notability is rather evident.  Ark yan  &#149; (talk) 16:12, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete Wikipedia does not consider a charcter major until it has the sources to provide real world context. Saying sources exist is not good enough, get them into the articles. If it's going to take a long time to put the full research together then it is better to delete the pages and make new ones later when ready. Jay32183 21:54, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Can you cite a source that defines when Wikipedia considers a character "major" enough for an article? One would think that the title role of a series (Thelma Harper being the "Mama" of Mama's Family) would qualify the character as major... Otto4711 13:36, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
 * WP:FICT says its based on being able to provide encyclopedic coverage, which means sources. No judgement calls needed. The most insignificant character in a work of fiction could be major if it has the sources, and the most significant could be minor if it has no sources. Most importantly "Wikipedia is an out-of-universe source, and all articles about fiction and elements of fiction should take an overall out-of-universe perspective." With no sources to establish the real world context, Wikipedia should not have an article on the subject. Jay32183 18:57, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep all. If any individual character doesn't qualify for inclusion per WP:FICT, stick it in the root article for Mama's Family.  -- Dennis The Tiger   (Rawr and stuff) 00:10, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep all per Arkyan. NTXweather 00:47, 16 May 2007 (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.