Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Phil and Lil DeVille (2nd nomination)

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 Rugrats characters. j⚛e decker ^talk 21:02, 9 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Phil and Lil DeVille

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

This does not establish notability independent of Rugrats through the inclusion of real world information from reliable, third party sources. Most of the information is made up of plot details better suited to Wikia. There is no current assertion for future improvement of the article, so extended coverage is unnecessary. TTN (talk) 19:26, 27 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. TTN (talk) 19:28, 27 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:57, 28 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:57, 28 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Comics and animation-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:57, 28 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: They're important characters, so they're good in WP:GNG. As for the quality of the article, I removed the fancruft and added a couple of references (still needs more, though). Supernerd11 :D Firemind ^_^ Pokedex 19:01, 28 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I don't really see how those provide significant coverage for the characters. All you've done is source a piece of primary information and the voice actor, and neither of the sources do more than outline the premise of the characters (and I really don't see how an ancient fan site is reliable in the first place). Without something related to actual reception, it still fails to establish notability. TTN (talk) 19:15, 28 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately, that was the best I could do with all the blocks the school put on this computer, but I figure that something's better than nothing. Hopefully someone else with less censorship on their computer can add some more sources (I know, we don't establish notability by what could happen and all that, but they're major characters, all we need is some good sources). Supernerd11 :D Firemind ^_^ Pokedex 21:32, 28 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Merge into List of Rugrats characters: After doing a lot more looking into the page history, what sources I can, etc, I've come to the conclusion that it'd be better to merge this page into the collection of all Rugrats characters. Supernerd11 :D Firemind ^_^ Pokedex 22:39, 28 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to List of Rugrats characters. These characters do not demonstrate notability independent of the cartoon. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 18:28, 1 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Keep or Redirect to List of Rugrats characters since there is only few sources, as there is no way to delete it since it meets its notability. JJ98 (Talk) 18:56, 1 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to character list. It's only slightly expanded and uses the same...um, sources given there. Even if expanded, I would scream notability. — Wylie pedia 14:44, 3 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to character list. Dwanyewest (talk) 20:04, 8 March 2014 (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.