382:
addition to posting in these threads, I also looked for and added references to the articles in question, which means the addition of different references to the respective articles. I just see nothing productive from making such a point as it has nothing to do with the merits of the article under discussion. Thus, my contribution here goes beyond my comments in defense of the articles as I also personally worked a bit to improve the articles in question. My feeling is that this stub is expandable and improveable and I began some steps in that direction. I wouldn't lose sleep over a merge and redirect that retains the edit history for when additional sources turn up, which I believe is likely given that a third film is still coming out. Considering that we will have had three films, two novels, and even a video game, the main characters will have coverage in a wide variety of media and these articles serve as a means of navigating to those different media. Best, --
354:
consensus. There is no firm precedent for deletion either, but in this particular case recent AfDs concerning other characters in this franchise closed as merge and redirect and given the suggestion above about merging to a character list, I see no reason why that wouldn't be a good idea. We know from the references that have been presented the character is not made up, that he appears in a mainstream theatrical film and novelization of that film and that reviews in even multiple languages acknowledge this character, i.e. it is not merely a case of some anonymous Girl 3 or something in the credits. If we keep this verifiable content in some manner, then we augment our coverage of this still growing franchise (a third film is on route), so it isn't as if the notability is decreasing for these characters either. I see no benefit to the project with outright deletion here. Sincerely, --
405:
If you check the wording, it is not "exactly" the same as
Michael is the more notable character thus far in the franchise, but the coverage is non-trivial enough for Alexander in multiple secondary sources that the character merits inclusion on our project in some manner, whether it is to be kept and
367:
for deletion on precedent. Nor is this a speedy deletion candidate, so whether it is "made up" is not in question. Whether it is of "benefit to the project" to delete stubs on fictional characters is outwith the scope of this deletion discussion, but it is certainly commonplace and thus is not out of
609:
due to lack of notability. The article is not salvageable... the three references of the four in this present revision only repeat what is shown by the primary sources. Just because secondary sources repeat the basic information does not make the figure notable. The fourth reference about how the
381:
It is strange to point out the style of one editor's argument when it is opposite of what you agree with while disregarding that others who agree with you took the same approach to these discussions on these particular characters, but it's not really a fair accusation of copying and pasting when in
339:
If you believe other editors should not be copy-pasting rationales, please bring that to the attention of the editor(s) in question. "Multiple reviews commenting on the character" have not been found - only incidental mentions of him in the course of discussion of the film plot, which is "trivial
329:
or does it only matter when it is someone who disagrees with you? Look through the sources. I would say multiple reviews commenting on the character who appears in both a film and novelization is not trivial and given the precedent of merging even minor characters I cannot imagine why that would
391:
You're free to work on whatever you like, but that doesn't change the fundamentals of our notability requirements, which are predicated on the existence of non-trivial coverage in multiple secondary sources. Furthermore, there is nothing untoward in me pointing out that what would appear at first
353:
Well, don't use a "copy and paste keep rationale" ad hominem approach against me when not taking issue with those on your side of the discussion who do the same. I am happy to discuss with editors, but not to entertain hypocrisy. And taking an ad hominem approach does nothing to build toward a
392:
glance to be a well-considered argument pertaining directly to this article had in fact been copied directly from another AfD with the names swapped - an easy way to avoid this in future is to not do so, and if it reflects badly on the arguments of other too then that's fine with me.
284:, for example) that establish notability of this notable character from the series who appears in both the film and novel. The consensus for even characters in this franchise with less notability than Alexander was to merge or redirect (see
340:
coverage" as we define it. And there is no firm precedent in merging minor characters, as you should well know from your participation in dozens or hundreds of AfDs on similar subjects which ended with a straight deletion.
292:), so deleting an article on one of the main characters given that precedent would be bizarre. Please also note that this is technically a second nomination per the earlier mass nomination at
505:
363:
Hypocrisy is saying one thing and doing another. I am not copy-pasting rationales, so I am not a hypocrite. You're right that there is no firm precedent for deletion either, but I did not
293:
285:
123:
289:
154:. There is no current assertion for future improvement of the article, so any coverage in the plot sections of the main articles is enough detail on the character.
531:
90:
85:
94:
199:
Does not establish notability through significant coverage of real world context in reliable secondary sources independent of the subject.
77:
406:
expanded on as I believe possible or even if someone wanted to make a reasonable case for a merge and redirect for now. Sincerely, --
277:
17:
581:
467:
Yes, I checked better and this is a notable character in the film. It plays a centric role. I changed the text above. --
625:
644:
36:
629:
593:
571:
546:
520:
489:
476:
456:
443:
410:
400:
386:
376:
358:
348:
334:
316:
300:
268:
250:
229:
208:
191:
163:
59:
643:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
173:
135:
47:
35:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
189:
81:
217:
589:
472:
439:
397:
373:
345:
313:
265:
281:
606:
542:
516:
567:
235:
204:
185:
73:
65:
308:. Several of those sources are non-independent, and there is no proof that any are non-trivial.
585:
468:
435:
29:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
393:
369:
341:
309:
261:
225:
621:
538:
512:
276:
due to significant non-trivial coverage in independent reliable secondary sources (see
260:. Insufficient non-trivial coverage of this subject from reliable independent sources.
181:
556:
486:
453:
407:
383:
355:
331:
297:
200:
159:
151:
139:
147:
143:
53:
111:
614:
coverage; it is merely an addition to play up this figure as if he is notable. —
221:
131:
615:
155:
434:. No notability outside the film but probably a searchable item --
448:
Hi! Just as a quick clarification, it is not a show, but a film
637:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
452:
novel that this notable character appears in. Sincerely, --
184:. Also the name itself makes for a reasonable redirect. -
580:
We are underway in creating a characters' article. Check
506:
list of
Fictional characters-related deletion discussions
482:
326:
322:
305:
118:
107:
103:
99:
294:
Knowledge:Articles_for_deletion/Selene_(Underworld)
286:
Knowledge:Articles for deletion/Amelia (Underworld)
290:Knowledge:Articles for deletion/Erika (Underworld)
234:Sorry, category deletion is a different process.
39:). No further edits should be made to this page.
647:). No further edits should be made to this page.
8:
610:character is received does not qualify as
532:list of Film-related deletion discussions
216:all Underworld characters to new article
530:: This debate has been included in the
504:: This debate has been included in the
146:. Most of the information is made up of
555:to whatever "List of ...", per CRUFT.
180:heavily condensed plot details as per
7:
582:User:A Nobody/Underworld characters
130:This character does not establish
24:
330:not be an option here. Best, --
323:copy and paste delete nomination
327:copy and paste delete rationale
18:Knowledge:Articles for deletion
394:Chris Cunningham (not at work)
370:Chris Cunningham (not at work)
342:Chris Cunningham (not at work)
310:Chris Cunningham (not at work)
262:Chris Cunningham (not at work)
1:
144:reliable, third party sources
630:04:31, 7 December 2008 (UTC)
594:20:49, 6 December 2008 (UTC)
572:17:46, 6 December 2008 (UTC)
547:20:47, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
521:20:47, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
490:02:34, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
477:02:33, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
457:02:28, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
444:02:26, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
411:20:23, 3 December 2008 (UTC)
401:20:18, 3 December 2008 (UTC)
387:20:00, 3 December 2008 (UTC)
377:19:46, 3 December 2008 (UTC)
359:19:37, 3 December 2008 (UTC)
349:19:31, 3 December 2008 (UTC)
335:19:20, 3 December 2008 (UTC)
317:19:12, 3 December 2008 (UTC)
301:19:11, 3 December 2008 (UTC)
269:18:40, 3 December 2008 (UTC)
251:15:18, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
230:17:42, 3 December 2008 (UTC)
209:07:52, 3 December 2008 (UTC)
192:00:33, 3 December 2008 (UTC)
164:23:53, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
60:05:00, 7 December 2008 (UTC)
664:
485:. Thanks! Sincerely, --
306:Copy-paste keep rationale
138:through the inclusion of
48:Underworld (film series)
640:Please do not modify it.
174:Underworld (film series)
152:unnecessary plot details
136:Underworld (film series)
32:Please do not modify it.
140:real world information
220:and delete category.
218:Underworld characters
553:Merge & Redirect
321:Hmm... Why not note
607:Underworld (series)
564:
74:Alexander Corvinus
66:Alexander Corvinus
44:The result was
557:
549:
535:
523:
509:
148:original research
655:
642:
618:
563:
560:
536:
526:
510:
500:
296:. Sincerely, --
247:
241:
121:
115:
97:
56:
34:
663:
662:
658:
657:
656:
654:
653:
652:
651:
645:deletion review
638:
616:
561:
558:
245:
239:
134:independent of
117:
88:
72:
69:
54:
37:deletion review
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
661:
659:
650:
649:
633:
632:
599:
598:
597:
596:
575:
574:
550:
524:
497:
496:
495:
494:
493:
492:
462:
461:
460:
459:
429:
428:
427:
426:
425:
424:
423:
422:
421:
420:
419:
418:
417:
416:
415:
414:
413:
368:the question.
271:
255:
254:
253:
211:
194:
128:
127:
68:
63:
42:
41:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
660:
648:
646:
641:
635:
634:
631:
627:
623:
619:
613:
608:
604:
601:
600:
595:
591:
587:
583:
579:
578:
577:
576:
573:
569:
565:
554:
551:
548:
544:
540:
533:
529:
525:
522:
518:
514:
507:
503:
499:
498:
491:
488:
484:
480:
479:
478:
474:
470:
466:
465:
464:
463:
458:
455:
451:
447:
446:
445:
441:
437:
433:
430:
412:
409:
404:
403:
402:
399:
395:
390:
389:
388:
385:
380:
379:
378:
375:
371:
366:
362:
361:
360:
357:
352:
351:
350:
347:
343:
338:
337:
336:
333:
328:
324:
320:
319:
318:
315:
311:
307:
304:
303:
302:
299:
295:
291:
287:
283:
279:
275:
272:
270:
267:
263:
259:
256:
252:
249:
248:
242:
233:
232:
231:
227:
223:
219:
215:
212:
210:
206:
202:
198:
195:
193:
190:
187:
183:
179:
175:
171:
168:
167:
166:
165:
161:
157:
153:
149:
145:
141:
137:
133:
125:
120:
113:
109:
105:
101:
96:
92:
87:
83:
79:
75:
71:
70:
67:
64:
62:
61:
58:
57:
50:
49:
40:
38:
33:
27:
26:
19:
639:
636:
611:
602:
586:Magioladitis
552:
527:
501:
469:Magioladitis
449:
436:Magioladitis
431:
364:
273:
257:
243:
237:
213:
196:
177:
169:
129:
52:
45:
43:
31:
28:
612:significant
132:notability
539:Raven1977
513:Raven1977
46:merge to
603:Redirect
487:A Nobody
454:A Nobody
432:Redirect
408:A Nobody
384:A Nobody
356:A Nobody
332:A Nobody
298:A Nobody
201:Jay32183
170:Redirect
124:View log
626:contrib
182:WP:FICT
91:protect
86:history
55:MBisanz
481:I see
258:Delete
222:JulesH
197:Delete
119:delete
95:delete
584:. --
365:argue
282:these
278:these
214:Merge
178:merge
142:from
122:) – (
112:views
104:watch
100:links
16:<
622:talk
617:Erik
590:talk
568:talk
562:4314
559:Ryan
543:talk
528:Note
517:talk
502:Note
483:that
473:talk
440:talk
398:talk
374:talk
346:talk
314:talk
288:and
280:and
274:Keep
266:talk
238:Banj
226:talk
205:talk
176:and
160:talk
150:and
108:logs
82:talk
78:edit
605:to
537:--
534:.
511:--
508:.
450:and
325:or
236:--
186:Mgm
172:to
156:TTN
628:)
624:•
592:)
570:)
545:)
519:)
475:)
442:)
396:-
372:-
344:-
312:-
264:-
246:oi
228:)
207:)
162:)
110:|
106:|
102:|
98:|
93:|
89:|
84:|
80:|
51:.
620:(
588:(
566:(
541:(
515:(
471:(
438:(
244:b
240:e
224:(
203:(
188:|
158:(
126:)
116:(
114:)
76:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.