How has this been around so long with no sources? Aren't biographies supposed to be deleted if they have no sources? Comatmebro (talk) 02:35, 24 March 2012 (UTC)
- Oh gotcha. Yea I just saw the title and focused on all of the tags and gave the article a brief scan so I missed the "fictional character" statement (which now that I look at it was very obvious). But aside from that, I don't get why there are such detailed articles about fictional characters that don't seem to have a lot of significance. I recently noticed the same thing with Tracy Jordan. I just looked over the notability guideline for fiction and it says "Articles on fiction elements are expected to cover more about "real-world" aspects of the element, such as its development and reception, than "in-universe" details." This article is just someone describing a character from a book and it doesn't say anything about the character's significance. And there's no sources to show it passes the general guideline. Is that enough to show it should be deleted? Comatmebro (talk) 20:03, 24 March 2012 (UTC)
- I have now added several citations to this article and have also reviewed the entire piece for the December Blitz (a distinction was not made between a fictional character and a real person in some sections and this has now been addressed also). I agree that it is a very detailed article on a single fictional character and I will address this matter in a separate section on this Talk page.--Soulparadox (talk) 03:05, 16 December 2012 (UTC)
- Oh gotcha. Yea I just saw the title and focused on all of the tags and gave the article a brief scan so I missed the "fictional character" statement (which now that I look at it was very obvious). But aside from that, I don't get why there are such detailed articles about fictional characters that don't seem to have a lot of significance. I recently noticed the same thing with Tracy Jordan. I just looked over the notability guideline for fiction and it says "Articles on fiction elements are expected to cover more about "real-world" aspects of the element, such as its development and reception, than "in-universe" details." This article is just someone describing a character from a book and it doesn't say anything about the character's significance. And there's no sources to show it passes the general guideline. Is that enough to show it should be deleted? Comatmebro (talk) 20:03, 24 March 2012 (UTC)
Notability edit
I am checking in to see if the Notability tag from over three years ago (July 2009) is still relevant. Has there been any discussion as to whether this is an article that is sufficiently notable for Wikipedia? If there are any other copyeditors out there with further insight, it would be great to address this sooner than later. Please refer to the above discussion also.--Soulparadox (talk) 03:05, 16 December 2012 (UTC)