Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Herbert (Family Guy)
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- 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 Merge and redirect to List_of_characters_in_Family_Guy#Other_characters. Page redirected to entry that already exists - anything else usable can be merged. Black Kite 08:20, 23 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Herbert (Family Guy)[edit]
- Herbert (Family Guy) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)
Delete This isn't at all encyclopedic. Not to mention there are no references. Essentially this is just another article created by fans.George Pelltier (talk) 14:47, 18 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Comics and animation-related deletion discussions. -- Hiding T 00:44, 19 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Merge into a character list Sceptre (talk) 01:03, 19 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete - no usable content here, and Herbert is already covered in enough detail in the character list. Reyk YO! 03:39, 19 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Merge, into a suitable article of minor characters. Such should be the default way to deal with these, and it does not take AfD. I'd certainly say he's not appropriate for a full article, but this isnt the place to discuss it./ DGG (talk) 07:51, 19 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Merge - Doesn't warrant his own page and should be merged into the character list. OlYellerTalktome 10:24, 19 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Merge - article rarely consists of anything except OR and fancruft. --Escape Orbit (Talk) 17:43, 19 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Merge - I like the idea of merging it into a character list. Eric Wester (talk · contribs · email) 18:54, 19 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Merge into List of characters in Family Guy. No need for a character spinout article without significant real-world information. – sgeureka t•c 20:03, 19 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep and do not merge, While merging may seem appropriate, Herbert may be notable enough to deserve his own page. Perhaps the character list could contain an abbreviated section with a main link to here. Herbert is a reacurring character and this article currently appears as the #1 link on google for a family guy herbert search. This article simply needs a few references, not an afd. I don't believe the reason for this nomiation is valid. There are numerous other family guy articles such as Cleveland_Brown and they have not been deleted.Smallman12q (talk) 21:38, 20 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
See also afd nom for
- Tom Tucker (Family Guy) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) by same nominator.
- Strong keep and not merge, per Smallman12q. Ikip (talk) 17:20, 21 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included on the Family Guy and List of Family Guy episodes page. Ikip (talk) 17:32, 21 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Redirect. Already adequately covered there, and has no real world importance. - The New Age Retro Hippie used Ruler! Now, he can figure out the length of things easily. 03:08, 22 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep notable character, enough information to warrant its own page, and some will find this information interesting. Those who don't, are unlikely to ever come across the page at all, so it shouldn't matter to them. Dream Focus 11:07, 22 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Note - I just want to make it known to whomever closes this discussion that no advocate for keeping the article in its current state have used any guideline or policy properly, asserting notability but not establishing this. - The New Age Retro Hippie used Ruler! Now, he can figure out the length of things easily. 18:19, 22 February 2009 (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.