Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Squidbillies characters

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 delete. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 10:59, 23 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

List of Squidbillies characters[edit]

[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)

Lack of sourcing. Per recent deletions through AfD, "list of character" articles are not being seen as notable without extensive sourcing. This has nothing: one reddit (!) source, not even anything in-universe. Andy Dingley (talk) 18:01, 31 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 18:05, 31 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Comics and animation-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 18:05, 31 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 18:05, 31 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete; just a whole bunch of unsourced unencyclopedic information which does not seem to pass GNG or LISTN. Could merge to a new section at Squidbillies but none of this content is actually appropriate for merging given that it is original research. Happy New Year! // J 947 ^{^{^(c)}} 22:31, 31 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - the nom's opening statement is incorrect. Recent AfD deletions did not in-fact decide that. They were for lists of "guests" or "vehicles" or "elements", but not characters, which are a something that is part of any TV series. The article needs to be better, that is without a doubt, but without that, the series lacks important information. --Gonnym (talk) 10:50, 1 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Kill Bill characters (2nd nomination) Andy Dingley (talk) 14:44, 1 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  - Yeah, but that was two movies, where all about the characters can be covered in the main articles. But this is an LoC for a show running 12+ seasons. – sgeureka ^t•c 15:24, 1 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. – sgeureka ^t•c 15:13, 1 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Keep or editorial merge The only character list for a long running TV show. Of course, if there was local consensus to trim&merge it back to the show article (which doesn't summarize the characters at all except for in a table), I wouldn't be opposed either. – sgeureka ^t•c 17:08, 1 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment – Neither of the comments opining to keep have explained how this list passes our notability guidelines. J 947 ^{^{^(c)}}, at 23:20, 6 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete or redirect. I'd say selective merge, but the character list appears to have nothing salvageable. This should be started from scratch in the main article's character section, focusing on the main characters. TTN (talk) 12:18, 7 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Per suggestion at UTP.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ミラ P 00:21, 8 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the Article Rescue Squadron's list of content for rescue consideration. ミラ P 18:26, 9 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Keep If it doesn't fit in the main article, spinoff articles are always created for character lists for notable series. Dream Focus 10:06, 10 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
They're not. Now maybe they ought to be (I'd support that), but our most recent practice is that LoC articles are being zapped wholesale, even for multi-book series with Hollywood movies (Mortal Engines, Kill Bill, Tolkien). Why should Squidbillies get a pass, especially when it's itself so lacking in sourcing? Andy Dingley (talk) 13:03, 10 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
They are over 90% of the time. Its about whatever random few people notice and show up at an AFD that determines things. Category:Lists of characters in American television animation shows a lot of these articles, plus many other categories showing additional things like this exist. And of course Tolkien's characters have their own long detailed list at List of Middle-earth characters. Mortal Engines has its character list at Fever_Crumb_(series)#Characters. As for Kill Bill, that's just two movies, and the main article list the characters in cast. Not that much to write about most of them. One has their own article though The Bride (Kill Bill). Dream Focus 17:26, 10 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
List of Mortal Engines Quartet characters For that matter, Kill Bill is about four or five films (depending on which you count).
Why did you say four or five? The navbox shows only two Kill Bill films. ミラ P 03:16, 11 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I don't have time to type up all the recent Tolkien deletions, character lists and everything. Andy Dingley (talk) 17:50, 10 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
What the hell?! Kill Bill is two films. And listing every single obscure character that was briefly mentioned in a single sentence in of Tolkien's books, is what was deleted, not the main character list article. As for the Mortal Engine list that was deleted, one person nominated it, one person showed up and said delete, and no one else voted on what to do with it, so it got deleted. Must not have been anything to it that wasn't in the main article, I don't know, since its gone now and doesn't matter. You can't use that as an excuse to erase thousands of character list articles of course. In most AFDs they are kept. Dream Focus 18:14, 10 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Kill Bill shares a universe and characters with other films, some of which are out (Reservoir Dogs) and a couple of follow-ons which are supposed to be somewhere in production. But Tarantino likes backstory, and he likes his backstories to join up offstage.

The Mortal Engines character list was deleted on almost no involvement by other editors (this is called "unanimous consensus" on Wikipedia) and not even a comment from the closing admin. This is why I've been calling at AfD for fomalisation of a minimum quorum for such an AfD to be valid. TTN (and just a couple of others) is listing vast numbers of fiction-related articles at AfD and unless you happen to have that exact article watchlisted, there's no notification across the main articles for a series. So we're losing fiction articles like crazy, on the votes of just half-a-dozen editors.

Still, it's better than Commons, where CfDs are equally narrowly visible, then they expand afterwards so that category trees which had never even been mentioned in the CfD get deleted too. Then they hold a second CfD, after the deletion.

But, Squidbillies? Sourcing, much? Andy Dingley (talk) 18:38, 10 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Andy Dingley: FWIW I've put a bit of advice at Dream Focus's UTP. ミラ P 03:15, 11 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I'd like to see an argument that this passes our notability guidelines here. We really can't just keep this article how it is I think (and I'm no proponent of TNT). J 947 ^{^{^(c)}}, at 22:32, 10 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

delete. For such a long-running show, there is surprisingly little RS about the characters. I guess cable cartoons for grownups are dime-a-dozen nowadays. I realize there's an OTHERSTUFF argument that could be made w/r/t other lists for other cartoons, but I don't think OTHERSTUFF is strong enough on its own to save a sourceless list. ApLundell (talk) 16:45, 14 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 19:48, 15 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete- more poorly sourced fancruft. It serves no navigational purpose and there's no encyclopedic content to merge. Reyk _YO! 05:56, 22 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Article substantively fails WP:V being mostly OR. There is basically nothing to merge of any value that's sourced. And as Reyk notes, it's pretty much a bloated mass of fancruft. -Ad Orientem (talk) 02:50, 23 January 2020 (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.