Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Timothy McGee (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   speedy keep. Since all commenters agree the nomination is misplaced, I'm closing this down. Mgm|(talk) 01:01, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

Timothy McGee
AfDs for this article: 
 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

Procedural nom, contested merge to List of NCIS characters with an incorrect claim that the merge was not discussed. Article was tagged for over 1 month. Per WP:FICT, "individual character articles ... should only be created when the alternatives are not feasible".

Despite being a major character in a notable series, notability is not inherited by the characters. This article does not establish real world notability of the character independent of its series. No reliable third party sources and just made up of unnecessary plot summary and original research.

See Articles for deletion/Caitlin Todd and Articles for deletion/Jenny Shepard for precedent. McWomble (talk) 09:25, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Close nomination. It might have been tagged, but I can not find any evidence if said merge suggestion was actually discussed. And AFD is not the place to do it. Please go to Requested mergers instead. It's bad form to delete a an article that has a contested merge altogether.- Mgm|(talk) 10:18, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment. It was discussed at Talk:List of NCIS characters. McWomble (talk) 10:40, 2 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Speedy keep/close and trout the nom for disrupting wikipedia to make a point. If people are objecting to the merge, then the merge discussion needs to be re-opened. Stop trying to force things. Umbralcorax (talk) 15:23, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Reject out of hand - Since when is AFD the place to propose a merge? Though FTR, I agree with the merge. Grandmartin11 (talk) 18:24, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Speedy Close and keep Merger was contested, how does that translate into deleting the article entirely? Merger was discussed but the discussion did not come to a consensus.  I believe this nomination qualifies for a speedy close under snowball.  Theseeker4 (talk) 19:21, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Close We have a place for discussing contested merges. Perhaps it might be better if we were to should change our Deletion Policy and discuss them here, but that is not he current practice and should not be unilaterally forced. FWIW, the merges are less likely to be contested if they are genuine merges, with content preserved. DGG (talk) 19:46, 2 December 2008 (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.