Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ro Rowen

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. Stifle (talk) 00:02, 12 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ro Rowen

This character does not establish notability independent of its series. Without coverage in reliable third party sources, it is just made up of unnecessary plot summary and original research. TTN (talk) 01:00, 7 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Comics and animation-related deletion discussions. -- VG ☎ 01:47, 7 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. There are no sources in article either. VG ☎ 01:48, 7 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fictional characters-related deletion discussions. -- treelo _radda 09:45, 7 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
'Keep Main character in a series. its appropriate to have this as separate articles. Some of the content needs to be sourced, tho, at least in the series itself , which is the appropriate place to meet V. DGG (talk) 03:31, 8 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to The Zeta Project. The existing article is completely unsourced and original research and fails WP:NOT#Plot. Karanacs (talk) 15:29, 8 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete No gnews hits. Mostly mirrors and fansites in web hits. I'm not sure how "is a main character" makes this an obvious keep in any way. I'm also not sure that it is appropriate to have separate articles for fictional main characters if nothing is said about them independent from the work of fiction. Protonk (talk) 19:21, 11 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as this character establishes notability independent of its series. With coverage in reliable third party sources, it is made up of necessary plot summary and unoriginal research. --63.3.1.130 (talk) 19:45, 11 October 2008 (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.