Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Riff Raff (Underdog)

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 Underdog characters. (non-admin closure) Aervanath lives in the Orphanage 05:08, 8 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Riff Raff (Underdog)

This character does not establish notability independent of its series. Without coverage in reliable third party sources, it is just made up of unnecessary plot summary and original research. TTN (talk) 14:21, 3 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. -- treelo _radda 14:32, 3 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fictional characters-related deletion discussions. -- treelo _radda 14:32, 3 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete No content, no outside notability assertions. treelo _radda 14:37, 3 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep Major villain in very important childrens series--at the very worst redirect to section in main article. I continue to think it as a general rule inappropriate to nominate for deletion when redirection is possible. If there is some special reason, it would be helpful for it to be given in the nomination. DGG (talk) 14:58, 3 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Redirection is only really a necessary/desirable option if the article title is a likely search term, which this is not mainly due to its disambiguation. Even without the dab it would probably lead to a disambiguation page anyway, which wouldn't list this character as there wouldn't be a separate article about him. --IllaZilla (talk) 16:25, 3 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Not true. Characters currently on list pages indeed are and should be noted on dab pages. The whole point is to provide the reader an aid to navigation. - jc37 23:45, 3 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to a Underdog Characters page or some such. I'm finding lots of fairly trivial references to this character in books [[1]], and news [[2]]. A character list would meet notability requirements. No objection to a merge to underdog for now. Hobit (talk) 20:41, 3 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- List of Underdog characters is the place. --IllaZilla (talk) 23:30, 3 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  - Sounds good to me. Hobit (talk) 20:00, 5 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Merge and redirect to List of Underdog characters and List of Underdog episodes. There is salient primary source information here. Deletion of this isn't any more appropriate than any other character article or episode article. That said, the article still needs some work and development, and though it normally should be retained as a stub, I understand that there are those who appear to be "anti-stub", and so development on a list page is, I suppose, the next best thing. - jc37 23:45, 3 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete No need for a redirect. Article doesn't cite (or seem to be able to cite) third party sources. Protonk (talk) 03:26, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Agree that a rd is unnecessary - no references to demonstrate real-world significance. Eusebeus (talk) 19:37, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep or merge with List of Underdog characters. Deletion (i.e. no redirect) would be unhelpful to readers and casal editors. - JasonAQuest (talk) 16:26, 5 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Merging unsourced "facts" damages target articles. It's not a viable search term for redirect due to disambig.Yobmod (talk) 18:35, 5 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Note to closer Delete without merge would make the List of Underdog characters article have a big hole (Riff-Raff's henchmen are described but not Riff Raff?). Hobit (talk) 15:52, 6 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Major villian in notable series. Failing that, Merge to List of Underdog characters. Edward321 (talk) 23:32, 6 October 2008 (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.