Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Brody Nelson

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 redirect‎ to CSI: Cyber#Cast and characters. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:15, 8 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Brody Nelson

[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)

Sources in the article does not prove the character's notability, a quick Google search does not give any sources that prove individual notability, and per WP:N, it is not worth a standalone article. If the character is not notable, I suggest a redirect and/or merge to CSI: Cyber#Cast and characters. Spinixster (chat!) 01:59, 1 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Fictional elements, Science fiction and fantasy, and Television. Spinixster (chat!) 01:59, 1 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Weak redirect Let's have a look. The American Library Association is playing around with the character.[1] The Independent [2]. Newsweek [3] Except for the library one, which I wouldn't use in the article, these are more about the show than the character. Google Scholar is giving me trouble because there's a real-life Brody Nelson who wrote a bunch of papers. Google Scholar search for "Brody Nelson" and CSI produced nothing. Let me think about this one. Darkfrog24 (talk) 20:48, 1 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The Independent source is a summary of the show and only briefly mentions the character. Same with Newsweek (note that the article was written after 2013, and per WP:NEWSWEEK, it's a case to case basis on whether it can be used). Of course, as you said, the library one shouldn't be used. Spinixster (chat!) 03:31, 2 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect per WP:ATD. There isn't enough WP:SIGCOV for this. Deletion is valid, but there are mentions in sources that might fit as part of the main topic. Shooterwalker (talk) 15:46, 7 October 2023 (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.