Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Martin Crowe (Emmerdale)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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. Malcolmxl5 (talk) 00:14, 29 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Martin Crowe (Emmerdale)[edit]

Martin Crowe (Emmerdale) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Totally unsourced (since 2006) article about a character in Emmerdale which is all unsourced plot summary/original research. No significant coverage found. The character doesn't even get a mention in the Emmerdale article. Michig (talk) 14:03, 21 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. Babymissfortune 16:17, 21 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. Babymissfortune 16:17, 21 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. Babymissfortune 16:18, 21 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Removing articles like this is one of the best ways at least partially to reverse Wikipedia's Anglosphere bias. I might possibly support the retention of such articles if we had articles about similar characters in telenovelas, but as it stands ... no question; this has to go. RobinCarmody (talk) 00:26, 24 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete that an article can last over a decade without any sources shows that Wikipedia needs stronger, tighter guidelines on creating articles. The AfC process is helping, but I still think more needs to be done.John Pack Lambert (talk) 02:30, 27 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.