Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Grandfather Paradox (Doctor Who) (2nd nomination)

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 Faction Paradox. (non-admin closure) WJ94 (talk) 16:03, 6 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Grandfather Paradox (Doctor Who)[edit]

AfDs for this article:

[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)

While an incarnation of The Doctor, Grandfather Paradox displays little individual notability from The Doctor, and a search shows no sources that display that, either. The article currently does not meet GNG nor SIGCOV. Pokelego999 (talk) 15:46, 29 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Fictional elements, Science fiction and fantasy, and Literature. Pokelego999 (talk) 15:46, 29 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Faction Paradox - Completely non-notable fictional character. The closest thing the article has to a legitimate source is an unauthorized guidebook to the franchise, and searches turn up only the most minimal mentions of the character, in the context of plot summaries of the pieces of media he appeared in. While just doing basic searches seems to turn up a lot of results, almost all of these are discussing the use of the actual grandfather paradox in the franchise, and not this minor character. Rorshacma (talk) 18:42, 29 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Faction Paradox. Obscure character from an obscure spinoff. Obviously not notable. Dronebogus (talk) 22:35, 29 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete/Redirect per Rorschacma. Only WP:TRIVIALMENTIONs for this topic exist. Not enough to pass WP:SIGCOV. Shooterwalker (talk) 02:40, 6 July 2023 (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.