Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Aaron (The Walking Dead)

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 keep. After article improvements, character deemed significant enough for standalone article. (non-admin closure) ‡ El cid, el campeador ^talk 19:42, 19 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Aaron (The Walking Dead)

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

I've prodded it a while ago with "The coverage (references, external links, etc.) does not seem sufficient to justify this article passing Wikipedia:General notability guideline requirement nor the more detailed Wikipedia:Notability (fiction) supplementary essay. WP:BEFORE did not reveal any significant coverage on Gnews, Gbooks or Gscholar. ". PROD was removed without any rationale offered by a user since topic banned from deprodding. We then held a merge discussion that ended with no consensus (Talk:List_of_The_Walking_Dead_(TV_series)_characters#Merge_secondary_chacters_with_little_reception_here). Given the reception here is still a single sentence, I think it's time for an AfD, with my recommendation being a redirect to the List of The Walking Dead (TV series) characters. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 09:20, 5 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Fictional elements, Science fiction and fantasy, Television, and Comics and animation. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 09:20, 5 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect - The two articles cited in the reception section don't look to be enough to hold up the article. Unless anything additional is brought up here, I don't think it meets GNG at this time. That character list needs to be severely pruned, so I'm not sure if anything should be merged. TTN (talk) 15:41, 7 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: I believe this article will be salvageable as he is a major character on the series. It will take me some time to make a deep dive for sources, and I won't be able to start it until tomorrow at the earliest but I should be done by Tuesday at the latest. BOZ (talk) 21:33, 7 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Take your time, we are in no hurry. This can always be relisted at least once when undergoing a rewrite. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 09:56, 8 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
And so it has been. I got about halfway through what I wanted to look through, will resume most likely next week. BOZ (talk) 18:01, 12 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 09:28, 12 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Weak Keep. Handmeanotherbagofthemchips (talk) 15:56, 13 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
WP:AFDNOTAVOTE. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 18:24, 13 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete/Redirect per TTN. Insufficient sources to write enough of an article with real world context, and fails WP:SIGCOV. Jontesta (talk) 18:52, 16 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as the development and reception section has been significantly improved during this discussion and now contains commentrary about the character from multiple reliable sources. Would the nominator have still nominated the article in its current rendition ? imv, Atlantic306 (talk) 21:49, 18 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Atlantic306 Probably not, the article has been significantly improved since the version I nominated. I'd withdraw my nom but unless @Jontesta changes their vote, procedurary this can't be speedy closed. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 04:57, 19 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, I'm still not even done going through the available episode reviews, I've just been a lot busier than I expected lately. BOZ (talk) 05:26, 19 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Article has improved with sources regarding real-world significance, and nominator has indicated willingness to withdraw nomination. Doczilla _{@SUPERHEROLOGIST} 06:18, 19 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep due to improvements. Any additional issues can be handled through normal editing. Shooterwalker (talk) 19:11, 19 August 2022 (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.