Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Inheritance Cycle 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 keep. (non-admin closure) Ben · Salvidrim! ✉ 21:10, 22 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

List of Inheritance Cycle characters[edit]

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

Major fancruft, no notability, no sourcing Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 05:29, 8 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. ^{Babymissfortune} 06:20, 8 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. ^{Babymissfortune} 06:21, 8 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose deletion - As I stated on its talk page, I believe that List of Inheritance Cycle characters - while in shoddy shape right now - can and should be saved. It is notable in that it describes characters in a highly notable YA book series, some of which have been controversially compared to characters in other media. Such controversies and character descriptions are often too detailed to describe on a book page, and so having this page around allows us to keep that information. I compare this list with List of characters in mythology novels by Rick Riordan, List of The Underland Chronicles characters, and List of Harry Potter characters. The last of these is always my most-cited precedent as it includes paragraphs of completely-unreferenced descriptions of even minor characters (look at Ludo Bagman for an example), and yet it lives. As I asked on the IC list talk page, I ask that we at the very least postpone deletion for a month so that I can make some attempt at making this particular list acceptable. -- 2ReinreB2 (talk) 21:41, 8 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This can be saved and improved. Artix Kreiger (talk) 19:48, 14 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Mz7 (talk) 08:12, 15 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Keep and Improve As previously stated, the Inheritance Cycle series is just as notable as other series that have dedicated lists of characters. If there is too much original research or lack of sources, the article should just be cleaned/tagged for cleaning. Nanophosis (talk) 05:02, 17 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 14:17, 17 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Seconded - Keep and improve. The article should be kept and improved to fix any issues with referencing, apparent fancruft, etc. I will personally do this work if given time. -- 2ReinreB2 (talk) 00:22, 18 January 2018 (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.