Talk:Dermott Fictel

This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject Animation, a collaborative effort to build an encyclopedic guide to animation on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, help out with the open tasks, or contribute to the discussion.AnimationWikipedia:WikiProject AnimationTemplate:WikiProject AnimationAnimation articles

Fictional characters

This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject Fictional characters, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of fictional characters on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Fictional charactersWikipedia:WikiProject Fictional charactersTemplate:WikiProject Fictional charactersfictional character articles

Television

This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject Television, a collaborative effort to develop and improve Wikipedia articles about television programs. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page where you can join the discussion.TelevisionWikipedia:WikiProject TelevisionTemplate:WikiProject Televisiontelevision articles

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Dermott Fictel redirect.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

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

This article was nominated for deletion on 4 July 2008. The result of the discussion was merge.

A main character?[edit]

I'm not trying to cause problems but I'm not sure if this character deserves to be considered an important enough character to warrant his own article. He has only appeared in one episode and I have found no cites that say the creators plan to make him a recurring character. His alleged relationship to Brock may not exist and even this article itself admits that. For all we know we might never see this character again. If there are, however, some credible information showing that this character is important I might change my mind. Zombie Hunter Smurf (talk) 13:34, 2 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It's not important enough. I had redirected it, but someone restored it. And now I've restored the redirect. Rau's Speak Page 13:52, 2 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

And now someone has restored it back. Even though four people have stated on talk pages that it doesn't deserve a page, and no one has supported it on a talk page. If four on zero in favor of something isn't consensus, then the system is truly flawed. Rau's Speak Page 14:22, 2 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The page and its subject are not even mentioned on the redirect you set up. A redirect in such a case is effectively blanking or deleting the page, which should go through AFD, as I mentioned in my edit summary, and which community consensus is required for. --SRadnan121 (talk) 14:24, 2 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

They aren't mentioned because it's subject is that minor. It's like having a page for the paper that Crayola crayons are wrapped in. Rau's Speak Page 14:45, 2 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Though I'm still kind of new, I think the best bet for this dispute is to just nominate this article for deletion and see what the consensus is. Zombie Hunter Smurf (talk) 14:51, 2 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If it can't be a redirect, then its CSD. I can tell you the result of an AfD. Delete. Rau's Speak Page 15:02, 2 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Do it, then. For the record I'd support deletion, but you can't blank/redirect an article without AfD, and it's very innapropriate to edit war over it. Not to mention lame to then claim that you're not blanking it, when you didn't even make any attempt to merge the info to the page you redirected it to, which actually has no information about the subject. -- AvatarMN (talk) 09:07, 4 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Um when did I ever say that I didn't blank it. Don't put words in my mouth. Second, the information is far too trivial to be in any article, that's why I didn't bother to write anything in The Venture Bros. article. That article is bad enough. Rau's Speak Page 11:01, 4 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

In an edit comment, responding to SRadnan121 saying you blanked it, you said "I don't want it deleted, I want it redirected." You both were effectively using "delete" and "blank" as synonymns, and redirecting a character article to another article that has no information about the character is not really a redirect, is it? It's a blank or delete. Which needs an AfD, not an edit war, if the action is contended. Which it was. -- AvatarMN (talk) 19:15, 4 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I was not using them as synonyms. I used delete meaning delete, as in the article becomes a red link. And I redirected to the venture bros. article because it seemed the most logical at the time, as the information has no place on wikipedia, and the show is the source material for the character. Rau's Speak Page 20:00, 4 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sure the fact that, as you are not an admin, you cannot delete an article had nothing to do with it... Come on, you tried to take unilateral action, then were a brat and edit warred when someone pointed out that unilateral deletion has no place on Wikipedia. -- AvatarMN (talk) 08:54, 5 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No, it had nothing to do with it. I don't care what you think anymore. I'm done. Rau's Speak Page 11:44, 5 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Dermot is here to stay[edit]

According to this video commentary for the episode, They are keeping Dermot around, as "they can't get rid of him"

You can watch it here [1], by clicking Extras for Part 1, then selecting "Something Slightly More Real"

So there really is no more need for fuss, there will be more Dermot, they said it themselves. He might not be a main character but they are keeping him, so he should at least be classified as a secondary character, he just hasn't had much face time on the show as of yet. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dsrules (talk • contribs) 20:52, 5 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Is he around yet? No, and even afterwards, will there be enough information for him to support an article? Unlikely. And as there isn't enough info now, the page can't be supported, and therefore the process that has begun will continue. Rau's Speak Page 21:23, 5 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That's strange, since previous secondary characters had articles with even less info before, and this was never a problem. Is he around? Yes, will there be enough information for him to support an article? Yes. What more do you need than the creators and writers of the show saying that he will stay around? You'd rather have an article deleted until the character is more established?

Pay attention.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.23.194.12 (talk • contribs)

WP:POKEMON. And just because the character will remain in the show does not mean that anymore real world information will become available. And he also isn't even a secondary character. He's had one appearance. Rau's Speak Page 22:49, 6 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You seem to have major trouble with reading comprehension, so I will let you think what you want to think in your fantasy world. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.23.194.12 (talk) 19:27, 7 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You seem to have major trouble with civility and politness, so I will let you think what you want to think in your shit hole. Rau's Speak Page 20:04, 7 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I am in favor of merging this information into the minor characters page for Venture Brothers. When Dermott starts appearing in more supporting roles, perhaps then we could split it off into this page again. But the Venture Brothers universe seems to constantly expand, and if we aren't careful we will end up with an expansive character list that is inaccessible to newcomers. Just my 2 cents. $<math>Insertformulahere$ $Insertformulahere$ </math>

Adultswim.com accidently uploaded two episodes and Dermot is highly featured in one called Murder O'Clock, and now we know who his father is. "And just because the character will remain in the show does not mean that anymore real world information will become available."

Yeahhhhh, right..... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.23.194.12 (talk) 17:59, 12 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It's true. Rau's Speak Page 18:07, 12 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What happend in your life that you are unable to give it up? He was in THIS episode more than the one he was in first. Give yourself a break buddy. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.23.194.12 (talk) 18:16, 12 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm unable to give it up? Right. Anyway, he still lacks as much real-world information as he did before the season began. And they took Murder O'Clock down, so it's not out yet. Rau's Speak Page 18:32, 12 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]