Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cogman

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 Transformers: The Last Knight#Transformers. As an interim measure. This discussion envisions the creation of a disambiguation page at this title, which can link to the various people named Cogman, and also to the article that covers the fictional character. Sandstein 14:13, 30 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Cogman[edit]

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

Strange sort of fan page for a character which apparently only appeared in a single movie. Non-encyclopedic, consider merging with the movie's article, or delete altogether. ‡ ᕮl Cid of ᐺalencia ^ᐐT₳LKᐬ 03:21, 15 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 08:14, 15 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to List of Transformers film series characters or delete, unless decent third-party sources can be identified. Josh Milburn (talk) 10:31, 15 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Transformers: The Last Knight would seem to be the most appropriate answer given the lack of coverage on the character, and it would be useful to at least have some sort of pathway directing back to the associated film. However, I would not be opposed to a delete either. Aoba47 (talk) 16:46, 15 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect per both of the above. I think The Last Knight seems a better target, but if he's too minor to even be mentioned there, I wouldn't add him... Jclemens (talk) 23:53, 15 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Also not opposed to a DAB page in conjunction with merging this content somewhere else. Jclemens (talk) 02:19, 25 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete possibly a DAB could link to Transformers. There are several people named Cogman ( Genevieve Cogman, Bryan Cogman, Frederick Cogman ). Power~enwiki (talk) 05:07, 17 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Support DAB - Whoa! Good eye there, I wouldn't even have thought to check that. @Power~enwiki: ‡ Єl Cid of ᐺalencia ^ᐐT₳LKᐬ 14:44, 17 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

~~Redirect~~ as per the above. One would expect some degree of coverage on this character in either the list of characters from the film series or on the particular film's page, and leaving the current page as a redirect to such a location is not only a typical procedure with coverage of popular franchises on Wikipedia, but will also lessen the temptation for fans to try and recreate the page out of a desire to ensure coverage. A lot of good editing can happen in ten years. (talk) 18:09, 21 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, upon having noticed the suggestion right above mine, change to Repurpose. The current content could be replaced, with the article repurposed as an article on the surname itself, including a list of articles on individuals bearing the name. In a subsection on fictional characters, Cogman (Transformers character) or something to the effect could be included, as a redirect to one of the above-suggested locations. The act of deletion in either case is non-arbitrary. A lot of good editing can happen in ten years. (talk) 18:14, 21 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Read suggestion above.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, J 947^{^{^{(c) (m)}}} 04:50, 22 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Creating a dab page, as above, seems sensible. I'm not sure I fully understand Will's concern. Josh Milburn (talk) 18:11, 23 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
- Ah, Milburn! Haven't heard from you in ages. Anyways, if you're referring to my comment about deletion in the case of the suggestions I made/added upon, my only concern is that the process of deleting the current page, just to recreate it for one of the new suggested purposes would be a waste of time. It's not unheard of to just replace the content in an article which shares a name with a more encyclopedically suitable topic, that heretofore has not been covered, with information on the more suitable topic, without having deleted the previous revisions. A lot of good editing can happen in ten years. (talk) 19:29, 23 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.