User talk:George Ho/Thou shalt not dominate notability of fiction

Some advice...

(Just in case, there was a discussion in the Village Pump that may have some relevance here: [1]. Both I and the author of the essay participated there, but maybe some potential reader will wish to read it...)

I looked at the current version ([2]) and there are some things I'd like to point out:

• It is written "A character may be notable in any other way.", but it is supported by the case of some actress. "Non sequitur". Find an example of some character or just drop the sentence.
  • Actually, given the results of the discussion in the Village pump, I suspect that the general notability guideline is sufficient for the fictional characters. We just need an essay that explains what kind of description in what kind of sources tends to be sufficient for them.
• "Following sources either may or may not verify notability of a character: [...]"... Well, that is also true for everything else... Maybe "There are some types of sources that often mention fictional characters: [...]" would be better..?
• Most of the items in the list that follows are not really about sources (for example, "Popularity of the character" is not a source). They should be dropped.
• There are some parts that have nothing to do with the notability of the character. For example, "However, an interview may be suitable for a biography of a portrayer, [...]" is just "offtopic".
• The essay uses the expression "real-world impact that the character made". As I wrote in the discussion in the Village pump, that expression, though often used in various discussions, is not very clear: we do not really demand that characters would inspire some revolution to be described in Wikipedia.
• In the next list, the parts "Substantial length" and "Amount of coverage" are just too abstract. The whole idea is to say when the length becomes "substantial"; the general notability guideline already says everything else.
• Finally, the part "Alternatives to deletion" also seems to be "offtopic".

I feel that, after taking all this into account, this essay has potential to become really useful for deletion discussions. --Martynas Patasius (talk) 21:04, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

Renaming this essay

I don't want this essay to go to waste just because it is written for deletion discussion arguments. In fact, maybe I can refactor and reformat this essay for arguments of future deletion discussions. Meanwhile, coming up for notability of a fictional character is too soon right now, but I'll try. --George Ho (talk) 21:11, 12 June 2012 (UTC)