Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bridget Napier

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 keep. BJ^Talk 05:41, 19 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Bridget Napier

might as well toss a few more on the barbie; non-notable fictional character with all the usual fancruft issues. delete. Jack Merridew 09:39, 12 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. -- Jack Merridew 09:41, 12 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. -- Jack Merridew 09:41, 12 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. -- Jack Merridew 09:42, 12 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Character gets 52 ghits, although all are links to forums or the official site. However, using the character's maiden name brings up these results, which are plenty to establish notability: [1], [2], [3], [4], [5], [6] (from [7] - now deleted) As well as two articles in this week's newspapers about the character's death and baby:

Bryan Patterson: "Close Up: Elouise Mignon", page 9, 12 July 2009. TV Guide supplement. The Sunday Telegraph.
"What's On", page 7, 9 July, 2009. TV+ Supplement The Cairns Post. Matthewedwards : Chat 18:03, 12 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Minor character; no real-world significance. –Moondyne 03:38, 14 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as per Matthewedwards. Edward321 (talk) 13:34, 14 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
keep per Matthew's excellent research. JoshuaZ (talk) 20:16, 14 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep for reasons above Highfields (talk, contribs, review) 15:55, 15 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep deleting would make the site appear to have information gaps. If characters like this have their profile deleted then the same should be done to all characters from the same program otherwise it would be pointless. —Preceding unsigned comment added by KP-TheSpectre (talk • contribs) 18:47, 17 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I believe, and hope , that the meaning of the above is that she is a major character, and we should have articles on major characters in a series like this. If it means we should have separate articles on all characters whatsoever in the series, that's not realistic. DGG (talk) 22:41, 18 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, that is more or less what I meant. I think all the main/major characters should have pages but not the recurring characters such as Jodie Smith and Kyle Canning, or characters from at the very start of the series who haven't made a reapperance. —Preceding unsigned comment added by KP-TheSpectre (talk • contribs) 17:36, 20 July 2009 (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.