Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Vanessa Kensington (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 redirect to List of Austin Powers characters. Editors are of course welcome to merge anything they see appropriate. Barkeep49 (talk) 02:21, 28 February 2020 (UTC)

Vanessa Kensington
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

No evidence this fictional character passes WP:NFICTION/GNG. AfD 10 year ago was keep due to 'major role'/'google hits'. BEFORE does not show analysis of character that goes beyond one sentence or so (=). The mention in is even more minute. At best, SOFDELETE by redirecting to parent franchise, unless someone can find anything in-depth I missed? But please, check the sources before googlehitting us. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 11:40, 19 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here  11:40, 19 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here  11:40, 19 February 2020 (UTC)


 * Keep: Clearly notable, per the last AFD. Would we delete Elizabeth Bennet or Elle Woods! I think not!  Seriously though, I think the article can be improved and the topic is notable.--Milowent • hasspoken  21:58, 19 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Which argument from the last AfD are you referring to? WP:ITSNOTABLE, WP:KEEPPER, sigh --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 12:16, 20 February 2020 (UTC)
 * All of them. 12 years is a mere blip in human history, I shall not unduly besmirch the Wikipedians of 2008. Why do you sigh, fellow editor?  Not all arguments are created equal, I admit that.  Do you remember when there was a whole essay called WP:HOTTIE that essentially said all hot woman articles should be kept?  This was cited all the time, only partly in jest, and people wonder why we have a gender gap in editors.  And to be clear, I most definitely do not agree with that rationale, and see nothing wrong with you making this nomination to discuss the notability of this topic.  I see there are multiple scholarly articles that discuss Ms. Kensington, a few of which I added to the article already.  But I would suggest that gender gap issues may be at play in the views of the notability of this character.  Articles on male protagonists of fiction abound on this project (look at this beautiful unreferenced ode to Ender Wiggin), and I know that's not a defense to deletion either, but its food for thought.--Milowent • hasspoken  14:55, 20 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Wiki of 2008 was much less mature when it came to arguments, and it shows. As I've noted in the op, WP:GOOGLEHITS and invitations of in-universe notability are no longer considered good arguments. I will add Ender Wiggin to my to-review list, with a nod to WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 15:50, 20 February 2020 (UTC)
 * At least in 2008 editors used to try to improve articles. There's scholarship out there about this character, as seen in the few cites I quickly scrounged up!--Milowent • hasspoken  21:39, 25 February 2020 (UTC)


 * Redirect to List of Austin Powers characters. The article’s information is partly in-universe, and the parts that are not are not actually about the character, but the actress who played her and the film’s rating, those parts can be moved to Elizabeth Hurley. All in all, the article fails WP:GNG. Devonian Wombat (talk) 23:35, 19 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Merge to List of Austin Powers characters because of its brevity. No need for a spinout article at this point. – sgeureka t•c 13:20, 20 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Merge as above. Character isn't in the same league as Elizabeth Bennet to have a standalone article at this time; if she similarly lasts 100 years, perhaps then. LovelyLillith (talk) 22:47, 24 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Well Vanesssa Kensington is going to last forever, whether she is as forgotten as Nick Whiffles or not!--Milowent • has<span style="position:relative;bottom:-2.0ex;left:-3.2ex;*left:-5.5ex;">spoken 21:39, 25 February 2020 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. <b style="color:red">Please do not modify it.</b> 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.