Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Edward Carnby (2nd nomination)

< Wikipedia:Articles for deletion
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 no consensus for deletion and please note that AFD is a venue to determine deletion, not to decide whether or not to redirect an article. AFD discussions often end with a decision to redirect (sometimes to a relevant article, sometimes to a completely different article where the title happens to be a plausible search term), but these decisions arise because participants suggest alternatives to a deletion. Redirect discussions belong on the article talkpage. Sjakkalle (Check!) 19:08, 18 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Edward Carnby

edit
AfDs for this article:
Edward Carnby (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log • Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This article is essentially one long, slow running edit war between whether this should be an article or a redirect. The first nomination was a poorly bundled affair where the discussion didn't cover this article. Following requests at RfPP to protect the page as a redirect, I thought it needed to come here for the community to make a decision on whether the page should stay, be deleted or be a redirect (which can then be enforced by protection if necessary). I have no opinion either way. GedUK  13:11, 8 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

*Redirect. No independent notability outside of the game series. Even the sources provided in the article are about the series itself, not about the character. Rorshacma (talk) 18:07, 8 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - While I don't know how many of the google hits are relevent, the article about the character in relation to the movie alone is enough to convince me to change my vote. Rorshacma 19:07, 8 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Speedy Keep AFD is for deletion, not for winning edit wars. As for the topic, this is the central character in multiple works and so is a valid basis for an article just like Lara Croft or Sonic the Hedgehog. The character has appeared in two movies, not just games, and so the comments above demonstrate their ignorance of both the article and topic. Warden (talk) 18:35, 8 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep [1] covers the character. Google search for the character's name and the word "character" and that gives 60 results to go through. [2] I'm convinced already, so don't feel like digging through all of that to find anymore. They describe the character in the games, as well as the films. Dream Focus 18:59, 8 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Redirect to game series. No notability outside the series, unlike Lara Croft, who was a virtual sex symbol for awhile in the 90s and appeared in various merchandise. Article is just restatement of the plots of each game, which further underscores that there isn't much else left to say about him. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 19:04, 8 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Redirect Also no reason for bringing Lara Croft to the discussion, just compare to a sample other horror game character, which I've edited earlier today, Jill Valentine, and you'll see how the article Edward Carnby is completely lacking any estabilished Wikipedia:Notability plus no Wikipedia:Verifiability (his article has only 2 references). --Niemti (talk) 19:30, 8 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
And only 1 now, after I removed "The Alone in the Dark series is widely credited as being one of the first "survival horror" games; a sub-genre that was later further populated by Capcom's Resident Evil and Konami's Silent Hill franchises." which had nothing to do with the character. --Niemti (talk) 20:08, 8 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of video game-related deletion discussions. (G·N·B·S·RS·Talk) • Gene93k (talk) 21:33, 8 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 21:33, 8 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - Why are people complaining that this article doesn't meet WP:N, WP:GNG and WP:V when the persistent vandalism is much more clearly the real issue here? CyanGardevoir (used EDIT!) 22:21, 8 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
You don't delete an article because of vandalism. And what some called vandalism seems to be someone objecting to them eliminating the article with a redirect. The proper procedures for a disputed action like this would be to send it to an an AFD. Dream Focus 03:52, 9 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Firstly, it's pretty obvious that you do not understand this vandal - they have been asked to discuss, warned, and blocked. Secondly, this is an AfD... CyanGardevoir (used EDIT!) 10:10, 10 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Because it's the core issue, otherwise the "rv v" guy was right all the time, lol. (Btw Colonel Warden, if you're not "ignorant of both the article and topic" so much, go and make it "an article just like Lara Croft or Sonic the Hedgehog". Amaze me. Btw the article is hardly new, created in 2007, but apparently everyone "demonstrate their ignorance of both the article and topic" and it's the only reason that nobody's working on it. Of course.) --Niemti (talk) 22:55, 8 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
You could make it a better article by not spamming it with pointless citation needed tags. Please discuss your actions on the talk page with me. Dream Focus 03:59, 9 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep: The topic is about a fictional character in film and video games. It passes WP:GNG, per:
  • Chang, Justin (January 27, 2005). "Alone in the Dark". Variety. Retrieved June 9, 2012.
  • (in German) ""Alone in the Dark": Christian Slater as a private eye". Focus Magazine. Retrieved June 9, 2012.
  • Williams, Kevin (January 28, 2005). "'Alone' should stay that way". Chicago Tribune. Retrieved June 9, 2012. (subscription required)
  • Additionally, there's this source, but unsure of how reliable the source is considered: (in Norwegian) Haug, Vegard (March 13, 2008). "Edward Carnby is ready for adventure". gamer.no. Retrieved June 9, 2012.
—Northamerica1000(talk) 18:46, 9 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

OK I checked your links:

  1. Just plot.
  2. Just plot.
  3. Just plot.
  4. Just plot.

I see also you don't understand what independent notability is. It's this Jill Valentine#Cultural impact kind of thing. As far as I know, Carnby has just nothing of it. And that's why he can't have an article, because there is no significant reception of the character (there's only reception of the games, and of the film which was totally awful), because he's not notable. Myself, I'm now struggling with Christopher Blair#Reception, at this point he's only borderline notable (he was once, but then got quickly forgotten since the 1990s and there's very little in the modern Internet and it's much harder to dig up stuff from the old paper magazines), I'm not sure what will happen to this article (and this is what happened to it once before). Anyway see Raiden (Metal Gear) or Taki (Soulcalibur) in their entirety for what fictional character articles should look like. Or, for just some actually notable characters from some minor horror series (AitD is very much a minor series, it was just a one-hit-wonder in 1992), Aya Brea#Merchandise and reception or Scissorman#Reception. --Niemti (talk) 20:40, 9 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

And what about "this source"? Once again, take a look at some horror video game characters, like this: Leon S. Kennedy. Stuff that are needed, multiple sources discussing various non-fiction aspects of the characters themselves. If all you can do is to write once again write about the series, it's all already in the series' articles, and the characters are, you know, not notable. --Niemti (talk) 08:02, 10 June 2012 (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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Edward_Carnby_(2nd_nomination)&oldid=1137819600"