- 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 delete. czar 19:59, 16 August 2020 (UTC)
List of Animals of Farthing Wood characters
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
- List of Animals of Farthing Wood characters ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
A huge, huge list of characters from the franchise
The Animals of Farthing Wood, from the books and an animated series. Everything is completely in-universe and just retells the events from the characters' point of view. There is no actual encyclopedic information, i.e., creation, development, reception, cultural impact. There isn't a single reference. Suitable for a wikia
Fandom page, not Wikipedia.
soetermans.
↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK 15:23, 9 August 2020 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. Shellwood ( talk) 15:26, 9 August 2020 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. Shellwood ( talk) 15:26, 9 August 2020 (UTC)
- Both the TV series and book series articles just point to this list, so we’d be merging at a minimum. See WP:ATD, which should have been considered WP:BEFORE attempting deletion. You don’t need permission to merge and redirect. postdlf ( talk) 16:41, 9 August 2020 (UTC)
- Hi Postdlf, recently I had several instances where a redirect was reverted ( List of Simple series video games, List of Starship Troopers characters), so I went straight to AfD. soetermans. ↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK 17:50, 9 August 2020 (UTC)
- Keep The information about the animals is quite encyclopedic as it's likely to be what most readers want. And there's plenty of production information too such as first/last appearance and which media the character appeared in. As there's at least 8 pages about the various books and TV productions, it makes sense to have a list of characters like this as a common
appendix, otherwise the information will be repeated in each of those articles. As for Fandom, that's a rival, profit-making concern which exists to exploit volunteer effort to sell advertising. Why does the nominator want to promote that? Do they have shares in it?
Andrew🐉(
talk) 16:47, 9 August 2020 (UTC)
- If the TV series just shared the characters with the book series, it can link back to that article if this is merged there. So long as the character descriptions are somewhere, as that is a necessary part of our coverage of a notable series or franchise. These character list AFDs always neglect to consider that and instead pick apart the page in isolation. Really a waste of our time. postdlf ( talk) 17:04, 9 August 2020 (UTC)
- That is not encyclopedic information in the slightest, Andrew Davidson. There is no actual coverage about the characters beyond in-universe material. Wikipedia is written for the general reader, not for people wanting to find out what the first or last appearance is of a particular fictional character in a particular work of fiction. And why the hell are you randomly speculating that I have shares in Fandom? That's just weird not WP:AGF. soetermans. ↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK 17:50, 9 August 2020 (UTC)
- Delete, a gargantuan pile of original research that fails WP:LISTN by virtue of being completely unsourced, and WP:PLOT by virtue of being entirely in-universe. There is no evidence that the characters of this series have been subject to the analysis necessary to pass LISTN. Devonian Wombat ( talk) 06:10, 10 August 2020 (UTC)
- Delete: Holy crap, what a steaming heap of NOR violations. The nom and Devonian Wombat said it all, but let's add WP:V to this as well. I don't give a rat's ass what "production information" or "quite encyclopedic" content is in it if it isn't sourced at all. Ravenswing 09:51, 10 August 2020 (UTC)
- Delete- nothing but a lot of unsourced, regurgitated plot summary. Reyk YO! 09:58, 11 August 2020 (UTC)
- Delete largely unsourced and mostly WP:PLOT. Not enough coverage in third party sources to meet the WP:GNG, and nothing out-of-universe to meet WP:NOT#PLOT. Shooterwalker ( talk) 02:32, 14 August 2020 (UTC)
- Delete - zero evidence of notability Spiderone 13:30, 15 August 2020 (UTC)
- 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.