Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Baron Dante

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 Croc: Legend of the Gobbos. So Why 17:30, 19 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Baron Dante

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) 14:58, 14 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of video game related deletions. MuZemike (talk) 15:33, 14 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - A google search returns several thousand results. Although this doesn't assert notability, I must assume good faith that somehwere in those results are legitimate references, if anybody wants to dig for them. S. Luke (talk) 20:11, 14 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - A two-game villian in a relatively unknown two-game series is a rather unlikely candidate for having any potential to be even a half-decent (by WP:WAF standards) article. If you do find any sources, they would be put to better use in Croc: Legend of the Gobbos or Croc 2 instead. Nifboy (talk) 02:21, 15 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Merge any sourced content to Croc: Legend of the Gobbos. In other words, delete. Stifle (talk) 16:01, 15 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Unlikely sources exist for a minor fictional character such as this. Doctorfluffy (robe and wizard hat) 16:26, 15 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Croc: Legend of the Gobbos per lack of verifiable secondary sources establishing notability (fiction). Plausible search term. MuZemike (talk) 16:46, 15 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete for lack of significant coverage in reliable third-party sources, thus failing WP:N and WP:V. If absolutely necessary, re-create as a redirect. Randomran (talk) 15:30, 17 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.