Jump to content

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Andy Micklin

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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 redirect to Baa Baa Black Sheep (TV series). Clear consensus not to keep this as a stand-alone article. Somewhat scattered opinion about the various non-keep options. Redirect seems like a reasonable middle ground. -- RoySmith (talk) 00:23, 10 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Andy Micklin[edit]

Andy Micklin (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Subject is a fictional character from a 1970's era TV program that fails WP:GNG. I have been unable to find anything approaching the in depth coverage from multiple RS sources required to ring the WP:N bell. A Prod was removed when three sources were added none of which do more than establish that the character existed. The article appears to be a substantially unsourced WP:OR fan page failing WP:V. I suggest it be deleted or alternatively turned into a redirect to Red West. Ad Orientem (talk) 17:54, 16 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 18:53, 16 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
As far as I can tell pretty much everything after the first couple of sentences is OR. I'm not sure there is anything to merge that is adequately sourced. -Ad Orientem (talk) 18:08, 17 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Can't argue with that. I think the first paragraph would be fine to add. South Nashua (talk) 03:17, 18 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 06:16, 17 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 06:17, 17 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete, per nom. Not notable for stand alone article. Kierzek (talk) 16:03, 18 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jdcomix (talk) 01:50, 24 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
That looks like a good target for a redirect. Ad Orientem (talk) 22:58, 28 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 11:38, 31 August 2017 (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.