Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/John Brock (fictional 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 delete. L Faraone 00:41, 21 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

John Brock (fictional character)[edit]

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

Subject does not appear to have third-party sources, and the bit of text that does exist is quite POV to begin with. Wizardman 14:58, 6 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:22, 6 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:22, 6 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete There is no mention of the novel titles in which this character appeared, therefore this article could not really be useful to anyone. There are no sources to back it up that I could find. ~ Anastasia (talk) 18:42, 6 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per the reasons aboveUberaccount (talk) 23:04, 6 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to the appropriate bibliography section of author's page. Even merge some of this there, possibly. Jclemens (talk) 01:42, 7 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Agree with redirect. Bondegezou (talk) 14:54, 10 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Disagree with redirect, because the novels themselves don't have articles, and given the tone of the stub there's nothing to merge in anyway, plus it wouldn't be a plausible search term at all given the disambiguation. Wizardman 16:38, 11 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, SarahStierch (talk) 19:51, 13 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - fails WP:GNG. The content of this article is already in Desmond Skirrow, anyways. Ansh666 00:43, 14 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as lacking evidence of independent in depth coverage as required by the WP:GNG. Feel free to ping my talk page if more sources are added to the article. Stuartyeates (talk) 20:57, 20 June 2013 (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.