Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Postal Dude

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 Postal (franchise). By strength of arguments, consensus is to redirect. There does not seem to be consensus to merge, as evidence of reliably-sourced material is lacking. However, as this is redirect and not delete, information is available in page history for review. 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 15:04, 9 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The Postal Dude[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)

Fails WP:GNG, largely primary-sourced or plot-summary. The reception is very thin and cherry picked from trivial mentions in reviews of the game. Non notable fictional character. _{ZXCVBNM (TALK)} 20:01, 30 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. _{ZXCVBNM (TALK)} 20:01, 30 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Video games-related deletion discussions. _{ZXCVBNM (TALK)} 20:01, 30 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Postal (franchise). The reception section is all minor, cherry-picked trivial quotes. The primary development info can either be placed in the series article or in relevant game articles. TTN (talk) 23:25, 30 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - Pending better explanation for it not passing GNG, per WP:JUSTNOTNOTABLE and WP:RUBBISH, but more pertinently WP:NEXIST and WP:HANDLE. Dark knight 2149 23:34, 30 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I think "fails GNG" is rather self explanatory. It's impossible to explain notability that doesn't exist._{ZXCVBNM (TALK)} 01:36, 1 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect and merge to the list of characters from the franchise, TTN is right the reception is based on passing mentions only but it can be salvaged (kept) in a merge, the rest here is a fancrufty plot summary. Ping me if better sources are found, there is the unreferenced paragraph about a tie into the real world murderer which could make this character notable if there is some in-depth discussion out there, but I am not seeing much that is reliable. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 02:36, 1 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

That information appears to be better off in the article on the shooting than here, if a reliable source can actually be found for it. It's more relevant to the shooting than it is to the character._{ZXCVBNM (TALK)} 03:38, 1 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The information from Reception and Controversies sections can also be moved to each video games' articles, since they are reviews on such games rather than on the character. --LoЯd ۞pεth 15:23, 1 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Keep A quick Scholar search locates several mentions of the character, specifically in relation to video game violence and its effect on children. The same is true of a search of Books. It appears to me that the character has enough of a profile to warrant a standalone article, and the piece is well done. If a section could be added to discuss the controversy around violence in some more additional detail, it would be a slam dunk in my mind, but even without that I think it is a good encyclopedia article.--Concertmusic (talk) 21:10, 7 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion around violence provoked would be more accurately applied to the game itself, not the character. Character articles should include critical discussion of the character, not general aspects of the game such as whether it has contributed to video game related violence (although the entire idea of games contributing to violence in anything but an extremely isolated way has long since been debunked)._{ZXCVBNM (TALK)} 03:02, 8 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Postal (franchise) as a valid alternative to deletion. Absolutely "fluffy" and lacking of independent notability. No harm in encyclopedic information being mentioned in the main article, however. Red Phoenix ^talk 03:15, 8 December 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.