Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tony Lord (One Life to Live)


 * 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 One Life to Live. DGG makes a cogent argument that warrants redirection at the least. Merging can always be done later. Drmies (talk) 20:43, 30 January 2012 (UTC)

Tony Lord (One Life to Live)

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Non-notable character; article is almost entirely plot with poor referencing abundant Crisco 1492 (talk) 16:19, 12 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 00:38, 13 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 00:38, 13 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: The AFD template was removed from the article by 67.49.19.204 with this edit. Crisco 1492 (talk) 06:19, 15 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete The citations in the article seem to be insufficient coverage for notability, although they do provide verifiability. He isn't important enough to be mentioned in the One Life to Live article, except in the template. --Bejnar (talk) 08:00, 15 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Bryce  ( talk  &#124;  contribs ) 02:48, 20 January 2012 (UTC)

 
 * Merge or Redirect ' I am not going to defend keeping relatively minor character articles like these, and I really hope people will similarly not try to delete the material. Merge to a combination article about the characters in the work--the best compromise solution, or if not important enough, redirect to a list . So much the best compromise that I wonder we still see these arguments. Any non-trivial character in a notable work should at least have a single line description in a list, and a redirect to it.  (It doesn't matter how many characters there are--the more complicated the story, the more  need to explain it fully and properly). We're here to provide encyclopedic information--and if the main work is worth covering in the first place, people are likely to want some degree of detail. Why else would you use an encyclopedia  in the first place, if you didn't want detailed coverage? And, there is no valid reason why there should not at least be a redirect, so deletion is inappropriate.  Anything anyone might want to look up should have a redirect if there's relevant content in Wikipedia.   DGG ( talk ) 05:32, 20 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep Added additional in-line citations. This character was a leading role of the series for several years it was featured. FrickFrack 14:49, 23 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  Rcsprinter  (whisper)  21:33, 27 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete no significant information from third-party sources can be found to WP:verify notability. Listing the actors portraying the character is not enough to explain this character's reception or significance. Shooterwalker (talk) 21:37, 28 January 2012 (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.