Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Doctor Salvador

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 Resident Evil 4 creatures#Notable Ganados . MBisanz ^talk 03:40, 5 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Doctor Salvador[edit]

~~Non-notable video game character with no sourcing. It's basically a partial game walkthrough at this point, and I don't see much prospect for making it into something encyclopedic.~~ Newsaholic (talk) 19:05, 30 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comment That makes perfect sense to me and is a better solution than outright deletion. Newsaholic (talk) 00:48, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Merge into a Characters in Resident Evil 4. We don't need an article for every character in every game. FlyingToaster 19:24, 30 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Merge per Toaster. - Mgm|^(talk) 22:31, 30 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of video game related deletions. MrKIA11 (talk) 00:52, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete and redirect to List of Resident Evil 4 creatures#Notable Ganados There's a very good reason he isn't on the characters list, he's just an enemy. Dr. Salvador is already redirected there so doubtless this has already been gone over in the past. Someone another 01:07, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fictional characters-related deletion discussions. -- Raven1977 (talk) 03:38, 3 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete & redirect: to where "someoneanother" suggested. Ryan4314 (talk) 10:45, 3 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete or redirect: topic is completely non-notable as there is no significant coverage in reliable third-party sources. (Aside from some off-topic information about the chainsaw controller, which was taken from Resident Evil 4.) Someoneanother makes a strong argument about the importance of this character and how to handle it, IMO. Randomran (talk) 18:01, 4 December 2008 (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.