Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jasmine (Angel)

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 Angel characters. There is a reasonable consensus to retarget these articles. I suspect the fact that none of them have any sources bar IMDb, and none were added during the week of the AfD, shows that the characters may not be independently notable. Black Kite (talk) 19:47, 2 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Jasmine (Angel)

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

Article is about a fictional character who only appeared in one season of a series, totally unsourced since its creation over 10 years ago, and almost all plot summary. Receptions, ratings, and developmental information does not seem to exist, just mentions and comments on fan sites for the show. I am also nominating the following related pages because there are about Angel characters that are unsourced and almost all plot summary.

Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2017 December 9. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 01:34, 9 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Merge all to List of Angel characters--Rusf10 (talk) 03:48, 9 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 06:37, 9 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. MT Train^Discuss 06:48, 9 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Lilah Morgan of all the characters listed, she's been in the series the longest. Other articles like Khan Noonien Singh has had significantly less appearances, yet has an article. The rest on the other hand, can be merged. FaithLehaneTheVampireSlayer 18:34, 9 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

Keep all As I suspected, there's just too much scholarly attention to Buffy studies for any of these to be non-notable. Look at the Scholar links, above, and each character has the GNG met just from there, without even considering the news or (non-primary) book links. Jclemens (talk) 23:45, 9 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Keep all as the scholar links show academic coverage that passes WP:GNG Atlantic306 (talk) 14:07, 10 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Jasmine although mentioned in several sources, these amount to WP:TRIVIALMENTION where the topic of the text is Season 4, rather than tis particular character. In order for a subject to have a standalone article, the subject must be the main topic in a sizable chunk of text in a WP:RS source, this bar, which is rather hard to attain for fictional characters, is the that must be surpassed in order to WP:V the WP:GNG notability. Material from this article could be re-used in dramatically shorter version in the article Angel (season 4) and this article should redirect there. AadaamS (talk) 20:41, 11 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Jasmine - the references to this character in books by Rabb and Richardson (2014) and by Wilcox and Cochran (2008) are not trivial, and clearly surpass the bar mentioned by AadamS and WP:GNG requirements, all on their own. Newimpartial (talk) 16:54, 13 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Retarget all to List of Angel characters The articles have no useful information not already covered by their descriptive paragraphs on the List of Angel characters. It is also full of fancruft or stuff better left for Wikia. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 17:10, 15 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect all to List of Angel characters and merge from history if necessary. Insufficient coverage. Sandstein 14:03, 16 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Winged Blades^Godric 04:15, 17 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:07, 20 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect all to List of Angel characters. As stated above, there is so much scholarly attention to the Buffyverse that anything related will have reliable sources. It's not a question of notability, but of substance. Ifnord (talk) 16:00, 25 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ansh 666 07:04, 26 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect Insufficient standalone coverage in reliable secondary sources for its own article. Nwlaw63 (talk) 19:09, 26 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not sure what 'insufficient coverage' means: GNG is clearly met for each one of these characters through the scholarly sources listed and referred to above. Simply repeating 'insufficient sources' doesn't make it true, and all such redirect opinions are not factually accurate and should be discounted by the closing admin. Jclemens (talk) 19:47, 26 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to List of Angel characters. This is an unsourced plot summary. Not significantly covered in secondary sources to develop the article beyond WP:PLOT. Lack of significant coverage fails WP:GNG. See WP:FICTION. PriceDL (talk) 02:00, 2 January 2018 (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.