Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Haruhi Suzumiya characters

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 no consensus as between keep and merge. Definitely a consensus against deletion. As is standard, discussions on the appropriateness and extent of any merger can be taken forward on the article talk page, or performed in line with WP:BB. Stifle (talk) 10:55, 10 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

List of Haruhi Suzumiya characters[edit]

[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)

Unsourced in-universe fancruft; WP:V, WP:LISTN, WP:NOTPLOT. The only exception is the section about series protagonist Haruhi Suzumiya (character), which has sources and real-world information. But since she has an article of her own, of which the section here is a summary, nothing of value is lost by deleting the article. And the sources about Haruhi Suzumiya the character do not establish notability for this list of characters. Sandstein 18:31, 22 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Pinging contributors to the recently closed Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Yuki Nagato: @Lullabying, Dronebogus, Devonian Wombat, and Piotrus: you may want to comment since you already evaluated this topic area's sources. Sandstein 18:35, 22 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Anime and manga-related deletion discussions. – Lord Bolingbroke (talk) 19:10, 22 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. – Lord Bolingbroke (talk) 19:10, 22 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. I'd expect this list for a major anime is notable and meets LISTN, but I don't have time right now to review the sources. There is some discussion of other characters like Kyon here. Hope the rescue squadron and resident inclusionists can help, ping User:Toughpigs. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 01:56, 23 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
KEEP Character list have always been valid WP:spinoff articles. If it won't fit in the main article, you create a side article to hold it. Dream Focus 03:04, 24 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
KEEP I don't think this is a case for complete and utter deletion, but rather for the dissection of fancruft from the article itself. IseDaByThatEditsTheBoat (talk) 14:33, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Selective Merge to Haruhi Suzumiya, there is no evidence that this is a topic that passes WP:LISTN, since secondary sources are only to be found for one of the characters. If the article is a split, that is not a reason to keep, as this level of absurdly detailed fancruft should not be anywhere on Wikipedia. If the fancruft is removed, there is nothing left. Therefore, the best course of action is to merge a list of characters, with the excess cut out, to the main article. Also, I note that even if you merged the entirety of this article to the main article, it would still be under 100k raw bytes, nevermind 100k in prose. Devonian Wombat (talk) 01:00, 28 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per reasoning by Dream Focus. Several notable characters are listed on the page, such as Yuki Nagato (as she was the lead character in one of the official spin-offs). lullabying (talk) 11:09, 29 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Merge the main character list to Haruhi Suzumiya#Plot where they can be covered proportionate to their coverage in reliable, secondary source. No one has provided sources that assert that these characters as a set are independently notable from the series. The only "notable" character right now is the title character, who has her own article and set of sources. The rest have not demonstrated source coverage. (not watching, please {{ping}}) czar 22:35, 29 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Merge no evidence is presented that the list meets WP:LISTN. Coverage of characters on the main article should be proportionate to coverage in independent RS for an out of universe perspective. b uidhe 14:24, 30 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Black Kite (talk) 00:16, 1 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Buidhe: @Czar: This really doesn't do much for spin-offs like The Disappearance of Nagato Yuki-chan. Not to mention, there are news and reviews from Anime News Network here and here that could easily be used as sources for some character descriptions. lullabying (talk) 21:49, 2 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Both of those look like in universe plot summaries which, unless they are adding independent analysis/commentary, should not contribute to WP:N. b uidhe 21:52, 2 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Every article should be reasonably self-contained for anything readers need to know about the topic. If any extra background is needed for recurring characters, the series article is more than sufficient, but as for weight, unless there's some overabundance of secondary source commentary/analysis about the characters as a group, a summary style split would be unwarranted. Cover proportionately in the parent article as needed, only covering the internal universe as warranted by its secondary source prevalence. czar 22:23, 2 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as per Dream Focus. Standard WP:SPINOUT article Satellizer el Bridget ^(Talk) 02:07, 4 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Satellizer, spinout articles are useful as a matter of style and organization, but they still need to comply with all of Wikipedia's inclusion rules. In particular, they must be about notable topics (WP:N), and they must comply with the policy about what Wikipedia articles are not - particularly, that they are not only descriptions of the plot of works of fiction (WP:NOTPLOT). This article fails these policies. Sandstein 09:01, 4 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Leaning keep and improve. I think a no-consensus close would be appropriate, with an understanding that this article can be revisited and renominated for deletion in some number of months if not improved. BD2412 T 22:39, 9 June 2020 (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.