942:, regarding another character from this series, closed on Feb 2 as a very clear keep, the nomination having received only one !vote beyond the nominator. I see no explanation why this AfD of a similar character from the same series, by the same nominator, would be treated any differently. The nomination simply says "unsourced fictional character bio"; that doesn't claim the character isn't notable. At
793:
characters in a major notable series are trivial. Her question as to why should these exist in more than one place is easily addressed by the fact that that the other locations where these characters are mentioned do so in a very trivial manner, and to expand those elsewhere trivial mentions would overburden and unbalance those other articles. These nicely meet
445:. Article is no longer unreferenced or only plot, but rather contains sourced information on development and reception from newspapers as indicated above concerning this notable character from a memorable show watched by millions and I hope/expect anyone who said it was unsourced will update their comments accordingly. There are literally
859:. Arguments directed to editors' personal opinion as to the artistic merits (or lack thereof) of the series or any of the characters are utterly irrelevant. The extensive availabilty of reliable secondary sourcing on what are objectively iconic characters in a long-running award-winning series evidence to the contrary.
649:ā¦which amounts to you calling me a troll, as that's what DENY is referring to. Full disclosure: I consider you a troll, and you probably have a diff of me having done so. I've certainly used DENY that way, myself, so this is just more of your parroting statements by others about yourself back at them. See
591:
Rather, it indicates that because of the character's race, part of the available sources discussing the character's development and reception emphasize that aspect of the character, i.e. the character is notable due to its relevance in racial depictions in popular culture, which seems irrefutable. --
590:
Saying that Venus
Flytrap is "character who has indeed significance due to the depiction of African-American in popular culture in a time when as the actor himself acknowledges few such depictions existed" says absolutely nothing about the intention of the nominator concerning the character's race.
797:
and improve the encyclopedia for those readers who might expect to find such information. Her personal opinion about them being trivial characters from the past, is just that... an opinion. Notability is not temporary, and relegating these to a redirect to an article where they would have only be a
854:
The arguments being made here and in the other related AFD's in support of deletion are based on faulty premises. Problems with adding sources and revising tone, content and organization can be fixed; the articles can certainly be improved, a couple of different editors have taken a shot at them.
792:
Jack, I appreciate your taking the time to respond. In my comment above, I can only respond to what she wrote and not by what she might or might not have intended. One brief paragraph does not do justice to major characters in a major notable series, and I do not agree with her that the major
356:
955:), though sometimes these are combined into long articles that address all the characters in a series. So, coverage of the "Venus Flytrap" character is definitely appropriate under long precedent, and where it gets covered is an organizational question that can be discussed elsewhere.--
973:
I'd point out that the RFA referenced in the
Blackout (Ugly Betty) AFD resulted in sanctions against TTN, the editor who had summarily redirected all the WKRP character articles at issue here in Sept-Oct 2009 without notice or discussion (as well as hundreds of other
502:" is not a reason for deletion. I am familiar and have seen this notable show, but did not personally get into it. That does not mean I cannot nevertheless acknowledge that it was important for many others. As for as your other comment, we have seen
170:
855:
Those are not reasons for deletion, merger or redirection. Notability of these principal characters as elements of a work of fiction, is clearly established by the extensive secondary coverage of them in multiple reliable sources, per
950:
wikipedia covers TV series/episodes/and characters. Every single episode of Ugly Betty, for example, has a lengthy article, and every primary character has an article. Character pages are not uncommon for popular TV shows (e.g.,
723:
article and in the respective articles on the actors. How much more information do we need on these rather, let's face it, trivial characters from the past, and why would we need this information in more than one location? -
534:
164:
457:
character who has indeed significance due to the depiction of
African-American in popular culture in a time when as the actor himself acknowledges few such depictions existed. Sincerely, --
297:
943:
98:
93:
102:
921:
The problem with today's youth is that they spend too much time on
Knowledge and not enough time watching classic 1970s sitcoms. We are literally losing our TV heritage. --
125:
85:
323:
214:
A major character in an ensemble cast on a major program that was summarily redirected without notice or discussion. The same considerations that resulted in a "Keep"
130:
939:
352:
348:
687:
574:
It's in reference to your calling Bali ultimate a racist on the occult AfD, and alluding to that here by bringing up Tim Reid's race and implying that I'm a
185:
689:
152:
650:
89:
845:
and a rather minor series on the whole spectrum of TV shows ever produced. The level of coverage of all elements should follow from that.Ā ;) -
146:
997:
964:
930:
911:
895:
868:
849:
824:
810:
787:
762:
743:
733:
707:
660:
642:
624:
607:
595:
585:
569:
556:
510:
493:
461:
433:
405:
372:
338:
312:
287:
251:
230:
205:
81:
73:
67:
142:
17:
192:
856:
61:
359:
seems potentially useful, though I can only read that preview. I do think it's a little weird that we can have articles on
400:
886:
This should not even be under consideration. This exercise is a waste of time. I'm biting my tongue to remain civil.
158:
993:
363:
characters, but not WKRP characters. If WKRP had debuted in the IGN/AV Club era, this would be a no-brainer keep.
201:
unsourced fictional character bio that was appropriately redirected and has been inappropriately restored, twice.
1012:
807:
759:
704:
695:. Surmountable issues are not a cause for deletion just because someone ELSE has not yet done the required work.
36:
1011:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
926:
347:
It seems plausible to write a good article on Venus
Flytrap. From what I can tell from the Amazon.com preview,
35:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
653:, where this was all covered. Glad to hear you're a "Bigger man", potential girlfriends will appreciate that.
260:
If so, weighing in on these discussions in support of yourself strikes me as a great way to get banned again.
397:
283:
215:
620:. I am here to improve articles and discuss articles, not play games. I encourage you to do the same. --
989:
499:
952:
800:
752:
697:
446:
360:
922:
891:
798:
brief footnote, does not improve the project nor a reader's understanding of the topic. Thank you,
600:ā¦and you implied that I'm racist regarding non-Balinese. Are you standing by that personal attack?
389:
178:
960:
908:
846:
784:
739:
720:
686:
major and sourcable character in a notable series, who has received coverage in reliable sources
657:
639:
604:
582:
553:
530:
490:
429:
368:
279:
239:
202:
49:
829:
Michaelā¦ see Jo's initial post, where she referred to the coverage in the show's article as an
979:
864:
820:
794:
729:
542:
334:
308:
265:
247:
226:
29:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
901:
575:
218:
221:
article applies with equal force here. Let some editors take the time to add references.
746:
might benefit from some trimming, its total elimination is not the best answer, when it
278:
fictional character with no independent notability of its own. Then redirect to to WKRP.
887:
617:
613:
414:
956:
747:
742:
about Venus is "in depth", but I and many others do not. While certainly the current
692:
621:
592:
566:
507:
458:
418:
393:
364:
56:
771:ā my view, at least. All these fictional character articles are just plot-churn and
355:
could also be helpful; it provides some information on the character's development.
975:
860:
816:
725:
516:
450:
385:
330:
304:
261:
243:
222:
119:
454:
381:
616:
any further. I should not have relapsed today and should go back to following
538:
388:. While the topic might be notable, it's better to rewrite the article from
470:
257:
Am I to understand that
Josette and Jack are sockpuppets of one another?
242:
article where there is an appropriate level of encyclopedic coverage. -
783:. I'll not bother pasting this to the other three WKRP AfDs Cheers,
541:-girl ā a caricature of the many white female tourists the local
1005:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
473:
is
African-American, as was the character he portrayed in this
453:
that can be used to develop this article concerning a clearly
612:
You know, it is time to be the bigger man and not take this
631:
Are you standing by that personal attack? BAIT refers to
561:
What does any of that have to do with Venus
Flytrap from
738:
Sorry
Josetteā¦ you may think the one brief paragraph at
525:
503:
479:
442:
396:
around forever in the hope it is "entirely rewritten".
298:
list of
Fictional elements-related deletion discussions
258:
115:
111:
107:
944:
Knowledge:Articles for deletion/Blackout! (Ugly Betty)
177:
533:(who I believe to also be white) where I offered him
351:
seems to have a lot of information. An article like
392:sources rather than keep some random Wikipedian's
39:). No further edits should be made to this page.
1015:). No further edits should be made to this page.
815:Michaelā¦ we will have to agree to disagreeĀ ;) -
719:characters are already covered in depth in the
324:list of Television-related deletion discussions
191:
8:
318:
292:
988:- He's notable, so that's good enough. -
691:. No need to redirect, when the article
322:: This debate has been included in the
296:: This debate has been included in the
48:. Clear consensus and reasons to keep (
7:
775:. No depth is sufficient to satisfy
767:Sorry Michaelā¦Ā ;) I think she meant
635:, which is also a personal attack.
833:of encyclopedic coverage. This is
744:Venus Flytrap (WKRP in Cincinnati)
238:and then create a redirect to the
82:Venus Flytrap (WKRP in Cincinnati)
74:Venus Flytrap (WKRP in Cincinnati)
24:
837:a major notable series, it is a
693:can be trimmed some and improved
946:, I recently became aware just
18:Knowledge:Articles for deletion
857:Knowledge:Notability_(fiction)
529:you offer is my first post to
1:
998:03:42, 12 February 2010 (UTC)
965:22:19, 11 February 2010 (UTC)
931:18:09, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
912:17:25, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
896:01:37, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
869:17:57, 11 February 2010 (UTC)
850:17:25, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
825:16:13, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
811:07:08, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
788:03:59, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
763:03:36, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
734:00:05, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
515:Huh? I'll stipulate to being
268:) 20:50, 8 February 2010 (UTC
68:12:51, 15 February 2010 (UTC)
708:23:08, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
661:22:34, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
643:22:34, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
625:22:09, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
608:21:55, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
596:21:42, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
586:21:38, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
570:21:31, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
557:21:26, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
511:20:59, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
494:20:07, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
462:19:38, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
434:15:20, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
406:09:47, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
373:07:48, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
339:23:19, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
313:23:19, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
288:21:02, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
252:20:39, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
231:20:08, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
206:20:01, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
779:urge. Fans are, after all,
1032:
748:can so easily be improved
1008:Please do not modify it.
413:Unreferenced and just a
32:Please do not modify it.
578:who is racist re bulƩ.
953:Beverly Hills, 90210
506:of non-Balinese. --
361:Parks and Recreation
940:Bailey Quarters AfD
477:. You seem to have
740:WKRP in Cincinnati
721:WKRP in Cincinnati
563:WKRP in Cincinnati
426:
386:literary criticism
240:WKRP in Cincinnati
44:The result was
831:appropriate level
633:disturbed editors
484:our racist agenda
419:
403:
341:
327:
315:
301:
1023:
1010:
990:Peregrine Fisher
803:
769:sufficient depth
755:
700:
528:
482:
451:reliable sources
425:
422:
401:
328:
302:
196:
195:
181:
133:
123:
105:
64:
60:
52:
34:
1031:
1030:
1026:
1025:
1024:
1022:
1021:
1020:
1019:
1013:deletion review
1006:
948:how extensively
801:
753:
698:
524:
521:bulƩ (or bulai)
478:
469:āYou're right,
423:
420:
219:Bailey Quarters
138:
129:
96:
80:
77:
62:
54:
50:
37:deletion review
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
1029:
1027:
1018:
1017:
1002:
1001:
1000:
983:
968:
967:
933:
923:DanielPenfield
916:
915:
914:
900:Good for you.
881:
880:
879:
878:
877:
876:
875:
874:
873:
872:
871:
842:
827:
710:
681:
680:
679:
678:
677:
676:
675:
674:
673:
672:
671:
670:
669:
668:
667:
666:
665:
664:
663:
647:
646:
645:
580:Happy editing,
504:what you think
476:
436:
408:
375:
342:
316:
290:
273:
272:
271:
233:
199:
198:
135:
131:AfD statistics
76:
71:
42:
41:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
1028:
1016:
1014:
1009:
1003:
999:
995:
991:
987:
984:
981:
977:
972:
971:
970:
969:
966:
962:
958:
954:
949:
945:
941:
937:
934:
932:
928:
924:
920:
917:
913:
910:
909:Jack Merridew
907:a policy.Ā ;)
906:
903:
899:
898:
897:
893:
889:
885:
882:
870:
866:
862:
858:
853:
852:
851:
848:
847:Jack Merridew
844:
840:
836:
832:
828:
826:
822:
818:
814:
813:
812:
809:
808:
805:
804:
796:
791:
790:
789:
786:
785:Jack Merridew
782:
778:
774:
773:obsessiveness
770:
766:
765:
764:
761:
760:
757:
756:
749:
745:
741:
737:
736:
735:
731:
727:
722:
718:
715:: All of the
714:
711:
709:
706:
705:
702:
701:
694:
690:
688:
685:
682:
662:
659:
658:Jack Merridew
656:
652:
648:
644:
641:
640:Jack Merridew
638:
634:
630:
629:
628:
627:
626:
623:
619:
615:
611:
610:
609:
606:
605:Jack Merridew
603:
599:
598:
597:
594:
589:
588:
587:
584:
583:Jack Merridew
581:
577:
573:
572:
571:
568:
564:
560:
559:
558:
555:
554:Jack Merridew
552:
548:
545:, and others
544:
540:
536:
532:
531:Bali ultimate
527:
522:
518:
514:
513:
512:
509:
505:
501:
497:
496:
495:
492:
491:Jack Merridew
489:
485:
481:
474:
472:
468:
465:
464:
463:
460:
456:
452:
448:
444:
440:
437:
435:
431:
427:
416:
412:
409:
407:
404:
399:
395:
391:
387:
383:
379:
376:
374:
371:
370:
366:
362:
358:
354:
350:
346:
343:
340:
336:
332:
325:
321:
317:
314:
310:
306:
299:
295:
291:
289:
285:
281:
280:Bali ultimate
277:
274:
269:
267:
263:
259:
255:
254:
253:
249:
245:
241:
237:
234:
232:
228:
224:
220:
216:
213:
210:
209:
208:
207:
204:
203:Jack Merridew
194:
190:
187:
184:
180:
176:
172:
169:
166:
163:
160:
157:
154:
151:
148:
144:
141:
140:Find sources:
136:
132:
127:
121:
117:
113:
109:
104:
100:
95:
91:
87:
83:
79:
78:
75:
72:
70:
69:
65:
59:
58:
53:
47:
40:
38:
33:
27:
26:
19:
1007:
1004:
985:
947:
935:
918:
904:
883:
838:
834:
830:
806:
799:
780:
776:
772:
768:
758:
751:
716:
712:
703:
696:
683:
654:
636:
632:
601:
579:
562:
550:
546:
520:
487:
483:
466:
443:improvements
438:
410:
377:
367:
344:
319:
293:
275:
256:
235:
211:
200:
188:
182:
174:
167:
161:
155:
149:
139:
55:
45:
43:
31:
28:
884:Speedy Keep
384:attempt at
380:. Entirely
165:free images
974:articles).
795:WP:SPINOUT
655:Sincerely,
651:your RFC/U
551:Sincerely,
488:Sincerely,
888:Trackinfo
543:Bali boys
539:Ogoh-ogoh
500:Dumb show
480:uncovered
475:dumb show
449:of other
417:recount.
390:secondary
382:unsourced
349:this book
331:ā¢ Gene93k
305:ā¢ Gene93k
957:Milowent
902:wp:Civil
839:notably
802:Schmidt,
754:Schmidt,
699:Schmidt,
637:Curious,
622:A Nobody
602:Curious,
593:A Nobody
576:Balinese
567:A Nobody
549:, meet.
535:an image
508:A Nobody
471:Tim Reid
459:A Nobody
447:hundreds
365:Zagalejo
217:for the
126:View log
57:BWilkins
976:Fladrif
938:: The
861:Fladrif
817:Josette
781:fanatic
726:Josette
713:Comment
618:WP:DENY
614:WP:BAIT
467:Comment
455:notable
441:due to
415:WP:PLOT
411:Delete:
262:Fladrif
244:Josette
223:Fladrif
171:WPĀ refs
159:scholar
99:protect
94:history
843:series
537:of an
523:. The
486:here.
378:Delete
276:Delete
236:Delete
143:Google
103:delete
63:ātrack
717:major
565:? --
519:, or
517:white
394:essay
186:JSTOR
147:books
120:views
112:watch
108:links
51:talkā
16:<
994:talk
986:Keep
980:talk
961:talk
936:Keep
927:talk
919:Keep
892:talk
865:talk
841:dumb
821:talk
777:that
730:talk
684:Keep
526:diff
439:Keep
430:talk
424:4314
421:Ryan
402:ping
398:Pcap
357:This
353:this
345:Keep
335:talk
320:Note
309:talk
294:Note
284:talk
266:talk
248:talk
227:talk
212:Keep
179:FENS
153:news
116:logs
90:talk
86:edit
46:keep
835:not
369:^^^
329:--
303:--
193:TWL
128:ā¢
124:ā (
996:)
963:)
929:)
905:is
894:)
867:)
823:)
750:.
732:)
547:;)
432:)
337:)
326:.
311:)
300:.
286:)
250:)
229:)
173:)
118:|
114:|
110:|
106:|
101:|
97:|
92:|
88:|
66:)
992:(
982:)
978:(
959:(
925:(
890:(
863:(
819:(
728:(
498:"
428:(
333:(
307:(
282:(
270:)
264:(
246:(
225:(
197:)
189:Ā·
183:Ā·
175:Ā·
168:Ā·
162:Ā·
156:Ā·
150:Ā·
145:(
137:(
134:)
122:)
84:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.