Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Krissy (Barbie)

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 merge to List of Barbie's friends and family. (non-admin closure) -- Trevj (talk) 10:14, 2 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Krissy (Barbie)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Do we really need an article for every Barbie doll? I think not. CyanGardevoir ^{(used EDIT!)} 01:57, 24 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy Keep No adequate reason to delete has been provided. Note that Barbie dolls are documented in sources such as Warman's Barbie Doll Field Guide and Collector's Encyclopedia of Barbie Doll Exclusives. Warden (talk) 06:58, 24 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Merge to List of Barbie's friends and family which contains most of the same information. It would perhaps make sense to turn the latter into more of a table format. Mangoe (talk) 12:14, 24 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fashion-related deletion discussions. ★☆ DUCKISJAMMMY☆★ 16:34, 24 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Merge - come to think of it, merging is a way better idea now. Maybe I should've just WP:BEBOLD and merged it instead of RfA'ing this here... CyanGardevoir ^{(used EDIT!)} 07:16, 25 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Merge or Delete - This character appears to only be included in the Barbie "playline" for a short time and doesn't seem to have had much of an identity/storyline beyond just being a "baby" for the older girls to care for. As those familiar with the Barbie "universe" may already understand, Barbie's friends/family are constantly changing (a new character is often introduced, and within 2 or 3 years they're gone, never to be seen/heard from again). Certain characters such as Ken and Skipper have been around for almost 50 years and really do merit their own articles, but I honestly don't see the need to begin adding a separate "stub" for every single character that has been added to the line over the years. If she were to reappear in the future, developed some "staying power" and an identity beyond that of a mere "accessory" for Barbie to "babysit", then the argument could be made than she possibly merits her own page, but that doesn't appear to be the case as of now. --- Crakkerjakk (talk) 04:15, 26 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as per Crakkerjakk. All essential info is in the Friends and Family of Barbie article. Mabalu (talk) 10:50, 28 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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.