Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Canderous Ordo

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 Characters of the Star Wars: Knights of the Old Republic series. (non-admin closure) The Herald (Benison) (talk) 02:18, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Canderous Ordo

[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)

Was changed from a redirect by a new user, simply not seeing any amount of standalone notability for this character whatsoever; in my opinion it fails GNG clearly and the redirect should be restored. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 23:00, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Fictional elements, Science fiction and fantasy, and Video games. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 23:00, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect per nom. Additionally, the text in this article has several similarities to this article on Wookipedia and appears to run afoul of plagiarism and copyright violations as a result. Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 23:16, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I believe that Wookipedia entries are Creative Commons, but it's not a good look for someone to come in and immediately just start copypasting articles regardless. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 02:17, 8 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect per the nominator. As for Pokelego's comment, this doesn't appear to be the first time the user has put plagiarized content on this site. λ NegativeMP1 23:25, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as what very little is actually cited to reliable secondary sources is insufficient to meet Wikipedia:Notability. — Fourthords | =Λ= | 03:00, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Characters of the Star Wars: Knights of the Old Republic series as there does not appear to be significant coverage from third-party, reliable sources. I think a redirect is better than outright deletion as this is a viable search term that people would use and there is a viable redirect target. Aoba47 (talk) 17:46, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect again seems to be the easy way out. Personally, I’d delete, but that seems not to be the consensus. Bearian (talk) 15:05, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I intend to tag the article with {{copyvio-revdel}}, assuming this AfD is closed as redirect.
1. The initial re-creation revision has 91.7% similarity with the Fandom page linked by Pokelego999, with most of the Development and Fictional character biography sections highlighted.
  1. The violation can be fixed by providing attribution using {{Fandom content}}, but the apparent consensus here is that the content is not usable and should be removed by redirecting.
  2. Before tagging, I will copy the sources to Talk:Canderous Ordo. References do not require attribution per WP:Copying within Wikipedia#Where attribution is not needed (guideline, shortcut WP:NOATT), so this will not interfere with deletion.
2. The creator has been indefinitely blocked for WP:Copyright violations (policy). There may be additional unidentified violations.
Flatscan (talk) 04:28, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect as WP:ATD. The amount of sources is questionable for WP:GNG, but there is a valid alternative to deletion. Shooterwalker (talk) 19:57, 14 July 2024 (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.