Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Master Shake (3rd 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 delete and redirect to List of Aqua Teen Hunger Force characters#Master Shake. Apparently there is no specific notability guideline for fictional characters, other than Wikipedia:Notability (fiction) which for notability purposes refers back to GNG. Only the delete arguments are making guideline-based arguments on notability here, the keep cam has left the guideline completely unaddressed (there is no evidence in the guideline that "from a notable show" alone makes the character notable). Thus delete & redirect it is. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 08:17, 5 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Master Shake

[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)

Frylock, Meatwad, and Carl Brutananadilewski have been sent to AFD, so I thought it strange that Master Shake wasn't being sent here too. Like those pages, the character has little relevancy outside of the show itself. Also, the last deletion debate seemed to agree with Delete and Redirect, yet the page is still here? Harizotoh9 (talk) 00:02, 28 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - I made a mistake and set this up for the 4th debate. I had thought this page had been sent to AFD 3 times, but it was only send twice. I don't know how to fix this. Harizotoh9 (talk) 00:04, 28 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - Harizotoh9 - If you wish to withdraw it, simply follow the instructions at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion#Withdrawing a nomination. Personally, looking at the prior keep !votes, none seem based in policy.Onel5969 ^{TT me} 00:37, 28 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 03:48, 28 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 03:49, 28 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Comics and animation-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 03:49, 28 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of New Jersey-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 03:49, 28 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, then Redirect for the same reason as the other articles. JDDJS (talk to me • see what I've done) 19:19, 28 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I'd say Keep based on arguments on the AFDs of the other main characters' pages. A notable character from a very notable show. The page does need a bit of rewriting to add more sources, but it should stay. Paintspot Infez (talk) 12:07, 1 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - The article does need some cleaning but a complete deletion isn't necessary. The last AfD for this article did not conclusively agree upon Delete and Redirect; in fact the last AfD debate was pretty much a unanimous keep, and the article has even been cleaned up quite well since then. Grapesoda22 (✉) 02:25, 2 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings, Grapesoda22. Text cleaning does not confer notability on a subject, nor encyclopaedic value. -The Gnome (talk) 09:49, 4 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete and redirect, as being a main character on a notable program is not a valid rationale for keeping. In prior AfD's virtually none of the keep !votes are based on policy, as is this case here. In light of recent closures of other AfD's, delete and redirect seems to be merited.Onel5969 ^{TT me} 10:17, 2 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Keep votes not based on policy is a real issue. People seem very confused on the guidelines for notability, and often just vote because they think the subject is important, or because they like it. If enough people do that, then the AFD is declared "no consensus", and the page stays. Harizotoh9 (talk) 16:31, 2 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect per practice adopted for the articles on Frylock, Meatwad, and Carl Brutananadilewski. None of these characters meets the criteria for independent notability. Wikipedia is not a fictional-characters' random catalogue. -The Gnome (talk) 09:49, 4 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Grapesoda22 and others. If needed, the article can be moved to a draft space for cleanup. IceWalrus236 (talk) 00:54, 5 May 2019 (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.