Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sinister Beings

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 soft delete. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. MelanieN (talk) 02:04, 30 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Sinister Beings

[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)

Article written in advertisement tone C933103 (talk) 09:59, 8 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. C933103 (talk) 09:59, 8 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Just how? In any case that would be an invitation to either slap on the appropriate tag or to strip out the muck oneself. Me, I love removing guff.TheLongTone (talk) 12:12, 8 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I'd be far more concerned about the skimpiness of the sources, brw.TheLongTone (talk) 12:14, 8 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 11:52, 15 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 13:11, 22 April 2022 (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.