Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of unseen Coronation Street Characters

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. – Juliancolton | ^Talk 20:11, 10 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

List of unseen Coronation Street Characters

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

Per WP:INDISCRIMINATE. It's unencyclopaedic FAN and WP:LISTCRUFT. Very hard to verify any of the information in the article, and I suspect it was created just to add links to infoboxes. JuneGloom07 Talk 14:48, 3 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as WP:FANCRUFT and WP:INDISCRIMINATE. Unreferenced and most likely unverifiable by any reliable sources. anemone projectors 14:57, 3 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Pretty obvious case, given how obscure this topic is. The fact that this article exists (and everyone is listed as not being portrayed by anyone) Is very confusing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Layla, the remover (talk • contribs) 21:56, 3 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 10:33, 7 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 10:33, 7 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 10:33, 7 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 10:33, 7 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - no evidence of WP:LISTN Spiderone 11:53, 7 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. If we had some sources on the phenomenon of unseen characters in Coronation Street, maybe. No sources are cited, and I can't see them existing. Josh Milburn (talk) 20:41, 7 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per above reasons. Aoba47 (talk) 18:39, 8 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Per nom. GauchoDude (talk) 13:38, 10 January 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.