Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Frylock

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 List of Aqua Teen Hunger Force / Aqua Unit Patrol Squad 1 characters. I welcome a selective merge of relevant content.

I'm closing this AfD (and the Meatwad one) as redirect. Now, before someone screams, "But consensus was to keep," let me remind everyone that AfD is not a poll - outcomes are reached by evaluating arguments and sources, not a simple head count. While Frylock is notable within the series, he doesn't meet the GNG; there are no sources that discuss his character directly (I went through each source present on the main article at this time). Can't find anything elsewhere that's not a blog post or forum thread. If sources turn up, we can reinstate the article. Any questions are welcome on my talk page. m.o.p 04:54, 29 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Frylock

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Clearly, this not meet the article's notability guidelines for fictional characters. JJ98 (Talk / Contributions) 06:08, 19 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

*Keep Cleary this topic is notable, being discussed in detail in sources such as Studies in American humor, Drawn to television: prime-time animation from the Flintstones to the Family Guy, Encyclopedia of television shows, 1925 through 2007 and Television cartoon shows: an illustrated encyclopedia. The material should therefore be kept in accordance with our editing policy. Warden (talk) 06:21, 19 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Given that this is one of the main characters of a notable TV series, the only options are 1) keep as a separate article; or 2) redirect (with or without merging) to the series' list of characters. It should have been dealt with through normal editing and discussion instead of being taken to AFD. postdlf (talk) 14:55, 19 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Strong keep: One phenomenon I've frequently seen on Wikipedia is that someone will claim a topic is non-notable without first doing a search for sources. There are plenty of reliable secondary sources here: a Google Books search for "Frylock", for instance, turns up Studies in American Humor; Dracula in Visual Media; Atlanta Magazine; Drawn to Television, and so on. Also, Wikipedia uses the convention of splitting off articles on major characters from articles on television shows so the main articles don't become too long. Guideline & Policy Wonk (talk) 21:58, 19 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. — • Gene93k (talk) 01:25, 20 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Comics and animation-related deletion discussions. — • Gene93k (talk) 01:25, 20 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. — • Gene93k (talk) 01:25, 20 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Strong Keep - Major character in a notable long-running series, and also made a major appearance in a feature film. Grapesoda22 (talk) 03:16, 20 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Clearly, this meet the article's notability guidelines for fictional characters. Sharksaredangerous (talk) 23:29, 20 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect or merge to List of Aqua Teen Hunger Force / Aqua Unit Patrol Squad 1 characters: The individual fictional character does not meet general notability guideline to warrant a stand-alone article. Most of the article describes the character as a plot-only description of a fictional work, without providing reception or significance. The only section that gives something different is Other appearances which appears more a trivia-like section. Search engine tests (including Google books, news and scholar) show no evidence that reliable third-party sources address the fictional character in detail or giving it analytic or evaluative claims to deserve a stand-alone article. Google hits in tertiary sources are not evidence of notability, particularly when said sources are for the TV series where the fictional character is only addressed as part of the plot. Since the character is already covered in List of Aqua Teen Hunger Force / Aqua Unit Patrol Squad 1 characters and the article title is a plausible search term, I believe that a redirect is the best alternative. I would not be against a merge since the description in the list lacks references. Jfgslo (talk) 19:26, 23 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep Please keep this article in existence. This article is still necessary for Wikipedia Nashhinton (talk) 21:28, 24 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep: the sources here aren't really enough to be significant under the general notability guideline. But I feel pretty confident that some sources exist, and at the very least this article would be appropriate for a list. Shooterwalker (talk) 22:07, 28 June 2011 (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.