Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Josh Stevenson

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 merge to List of Waterloo Road characters. Arbitrarily0 ^(talk) 18:44, 7 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Josh Stevenson

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

The first deletion discussion for this article was a massive group AfD which ended in no consensus because there were so many different articles being discussed, even though all editors participating in the discussion voted either "delete" or "merge". As the previous discussion made it clear that each of these articles should be considered individually, I am only introducing one article into this discussion. This Waterloo Road character certainly fails Wikipedia's notability guidelines for fictional characters. Neelix (talk) 20:52, 31 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

merge, preserving content. there are no established guidelines for notability of fictional characters. Every sentence on every version of the relevant pages has been continuously debated for the last three years with no resolution. The nearest thing to being accepted in the compromise idea that there should be a merge in most cases, but it has never been fully accepted by those on either side of the issue. I still think it's a good idea almost always, & the only possible way of achieving a solution. DGG ( talk ) 23:30, 31 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 14:12, 1 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 14:12, 1 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to a list of characters article, per DGG. Jclemens (talk) 06:14, 2 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Merge and spin out later if there are good sources Arskwad (talk) 02:10, 7 June 2010 (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.