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.
It doesn't appear to meet
WP:ORG /
WP:GNG, or have a suitable
WP:ATD. It could redirect to Spooks but it may unbalance that article, or to the actress. Has been in
CAT:NN for 14 years, so hopefully we can now resolve it.
Boleyn (
talk) 16:03, 10 February 2024 (UTC)reply
KeepDigital Spy Retrospective,
Whatculture,
INews,
Telegraph. These aren't the greatest, but I cannot access the Scholar
article and
book reference that look promising. It'd be reasonable to start a
Characters of Spooks list as a summary style parent of all the other Spooks Character articles, so that any that might be found non-notable, including this one, have a reasonable merge target.
Jclemens (
talk) 23:35, 10 February 2024 (UTC)reply
@
Jclemens I can't access the book aritcle either, but it seems it is a mention on a single sources. The academic article is accessible through
Library Genesis and all we have there are four mentions in passing (two in quotes from interviewees or such), nothing remotely relevant to
WP:SIGCOV. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus|
reply here 02:14, 29 February 2024 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
✗plicit 00:01, 18 February 2024 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, LizRead!Talk! 04:32, 25 February 2024 (UTC)reply
Redirect to the list of characters or the show if there is no list.. We have only few mentions in passing and some low quality fanzine-level coverage.
WP:GNG is not met. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus|
reply here 02:14, 29 February 2024 (UTC)reply
Redirect per Piotrus. I don't see enough for
WP:SIGCOV, which means that
WP:GNG is not met. The keep !vote offers a merge as a compromise, and it would be fine to
WP:PRESERVE whatever mentions can be verified.
Shooterwalker (
talk) 16:43, 29 February 2024 (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.