Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Repo! The Genetic Opera characters

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 Repo! The Genetic Opera. ‑Scottywong | soliloquize _ 17:11, 9 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

List of Repo! The Genetic Opera characters

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

Not notable. All plot character list from a single film that is not that notable. No sources. JDDJS (talk) 20:25, 2 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:23, 3 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:23, 3 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:24, 3 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Merge back to Repo! The Genetic Opera, as the cast list there currently omits character descriptions in favor of this list, and I agree that there's little reason to have a separate list for the characters of one film apart from that film article. That could have been done without an AFD, but I do not see that merger/redirection was attempted or even proposed first; please do so in the future rather than coming here. The sources for character descriptions, btw, are the film itself, press materials, and reviews about it; it's silly to claim that content of a notable work is somehow unverifiable. postdlf (talk) 13:27, 3 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Merge back to where it has context and is sourcable just as is the film itself. In agreement with User:Postdlf, rather then being brought to AFD, WP:AFD suggests such as an action that does not require a deletion discussion. Such a merge would improve the target. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 08:08, 4 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Merge per above rationale. As much as I adore this movie, there's no reason for the characters to have a separate article for themselves. It's not that wide of a universe at this point in time.Tokyogirl79 (talk) 12:26, 4 April 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.