Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Water Rats 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 delete. Ajpolino (talk) 01:26, 18 February 2022 (UTC) After brief discussion at User_talk:Jclemens#Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/List_of_Water_Rats_characters I've restored the deleted page as a redirect to Water Rats (TV series). I still read this discussion as consensus that we shouldn't have a free-standing List of Water Rats characters at this time, but preserving the page as a redirect keeps the substantial page history (including material that was merged from several individual character articles) visible to non-admins. Ajpolino (talk) 20:03, 22 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

List of Water Rats characters

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

Effectively a dumping ground for trivia about non-notable characters. Fails WP:LISTPURP as none of the entries are blue links, fails WP:NLIST as no source discusses the entries as a group, and fails WP:NOTPLOT as the article consists entirely of plot trivia. Was deprodded on the promise of a source, but that turned out to be a Wikipedia mirror. Entirely unsourced. Avilich (talk) 21:10, 10 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists of people-related deletion discussions. Avilich (talk) 21:10, 10 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. Avilich (talk) 21:10, 10 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. Avilich (talk) 21:10, 10 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep No policy-based rationale for deletion articulated. Other than cleanup, the only criterion listed is "none of the entries are blue links" which runs afoul of WP:CSC. "No source discusses the entries as a group" is nonsensical for a list article of fictional elements from a notable common source. Jclemens (talk) 21:40, 10 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- In addition to the sources in the Water Rats (TV series) article itself, each entry can presumably meet V with a trivial search like this... which the nominator presumably already knows because his PROD of the article for Holloway led to its redirection to this article. This would have been material information to have put into an above-the-board nomination, one would expect. Jclemens (talk) 21:53, 10 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  Anyone can add a basic barebones list with the character names to the main article (which is effectively unsourced too, btw), but this right here is not justifiable as a standalone page, especially since plot information needs to be presented in summary style. Also, WP:CSC literally says, Such lists are almost always better placed within the context of an article on their "parent" topic. Before creating a stand-alone list consider carefully whether such lists would be better placed within a parent article. Since the list doesn't justify its existence through NLIST and NOTPLOT, CSC supports deleting rather than keeping. Avilich (talk) 22:13, 10 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- It would seem to me that the policy-based rationale is failing to meet WP:NLIST. You may disagree with the rationale, but it seems much to say it is not articulated. -2pou (talk) 22:00, 10 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Per nominator: not a navigational list, a lot of unsourced plot trivia, and just a lack of sources to justify notability. Fails WP:LISTN and WP:V, and therefore constitutes WP:IINFO (WP:NOTPLOT). The character list is already present in a suitable format in the parent article. Pilaz (talk) 15:21, 11 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
As a sidenote, I was looking forward to this Jclemens vs Avilich clash - it's like watching Godzilla vs Kong, except it's a radical inclusionist Godzilla versus a radical deletionist Kong. Pilaz (talk) 15:24, 11 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete.No issue with is per se, but it is only linked to one source, which isn't enough. Deathlibrarian (talk) 06:52, 12 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Merge. This is a 100% plot summary, and WP:FANCRUFT, but we have so many of such lists. I guess some of this could be merged to the plot section of Water Rats (TV series), but I don't see the case of retaining the list as a stand-alone, given that not a single one of these characters seems to be individually notable, nor that there is even a single sentence of non-plot summary analysis for them. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 11:32, 15 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I wouldn't support a merge here since the plot information is specific to each character, and unlikely to be of use in the broader article of the TV series itself. That a single sentence can be added to each character's entry in the main article is so trivial that a formal merge seems unnecessary. Moreover, it's not an article I would have created to begin with, since, again, it's effectively unsourced. Avilich (talk) 18:26, 15 February 2022 (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.