Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tuff (character)

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 List of Kirby characters#Tiff and Tuff. (non-admin closure) _{ZXCVBNM (TALK)} 18:13, 23 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Tuff (character)[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Redirect to Kirby: Right Back at Ya!. Character is already described there, and that can be expanded if deemed necessary. On its own, this character is not WP notable, and there is no outside coverage of his significance. Further, only the lead is not written in-universe ‡ Єl Cid of ᐺalencia ^ᐐT₳LKᐬ 01:36, 16 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 18:58, 16 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Anime and manga-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 18:58, 16 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Video games-related deletion discussions. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 19:29, 16 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to List_of_Kirby_characters#Tiff_and_Tuff and add hatnote to T.U.F.F. Puppy show which has a number of T.U.F.F. characters. Alternatively, redirect to Tuff (disambiguation) which also lists wigglytuff as having a Tuff nickname. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 19:31, 16 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
The content for characters present in only a single work should probably live at the work's page, rather than the series's character page. --Izno (talk) 19:37, 16 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Whether the List of Kirby characters should have characters from a single work is a different discussion. Tuff (Kirby) and Tuff (Kirby series character) should redirect to the same list whether it be the television page or the general list. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 19:49, 16 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Sure. --Izno (talk) 03:28, 17 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Is there a reason a redirect was not first attempted? --Izno (talk) 19:37, 16 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
- It would be easier to take your advice if you just said "Hey fellow Wikipedian, did you know about..." instead of asking a rhetorical question, which can come off rather rudely. I didn't attempt a redirect because I didn't want to blank an article without consensus. If that was wrong I apologize. ‡ Єl Cid of ᐺalencia ^ᐐT₳LKᐬ 20:01, 16 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  - The question was rhetorical? :) Better to be bold in an attempt to preserve the material in some form than to ship it to WP:AFD to start, not least because the term is a reasonable search term. --Izno (talk) 03:28, 17 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  - El cid, el campeador Technically, either approach is fine. Some editors prefer attempting to redirect noncontroversial, non-notable articles, as to not bog down WP:AFD. Others get irritated if one redirects it without an AFD. You can't win, depending on who you run into. But both are just ideologies, not a hard rules - you're free to bring it to AFD as you did. Sergecross73 msg me 13:11, 22 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect - fictional character without any stand-alone notability. Wouldn't be opposed to deletion, considering I'm not sure how plausible it is for someone to type in "Tuff (character)" into a search bar, but defaulting to redirect since the subject is covered at the redirect target proposed above. Sergecross73 msg me 13:11, 22 August 2017 (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.