Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Snow Scouts
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 Merge and redirect to Characters_in_A_Series_of_Unfortunate_Events#Snow_Scouts. Cheers. I'mperator 13:06, 4 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Snow Scouts[edit]
- Snow Scouts (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)
Article is not notable enough for a Wikipedia entry, and stands out markedly from other articles in WP:LEM. — The Man in Question (gesprec) · (forðung) 19:55, 27 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. -- Jmundo 21:39, 27 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment I would like to get opinions from members of the Lemony Snicket project on this. Drawn Some (talk) 23:23, 27 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- The project has been somewhat inactive for a while. I am not certain who runs it now. I myself am a member. — The Man in Question (gesprec) · (forðung) 03:41, 28 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Redirect (and possibly merge?) to The Slippery Slope. They seem to just have a cameo in Grim Grotto, but are a major part of the other book. Regardless of how much material is retained, the title itself is a useful redirect. - Mgm|(talk) 09:26, 28 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- I'm a member of the Snicket wikiproject, and I agree that its not that notable. If it can't be merged to another article, then I agree that redirect would be the way to go.--CyberGhostface (talk) 20:59, 28 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- I think it should be redirected to The Slippery Slope. — The Man in Question (gesprec) · (forðung) 05:25, 30 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Merge to the main articles of the two books in which they appear. It seems a shame to loose good content but we can't have every character or group from every (or even every notable) film, TV series, book etc with its own article, we'd be overrun- "opening the floodgates" to use a legal phrase. HJMitchell You rang? 07:20, 3 May 2009 (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.