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 redirect to Dead Rising#Protagonists. MelanieN (talk) 00:59, 25 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: In the future if you feel something should be redirected, please say so! Even if my "common sense" suggests a redirect, I can't override a clear consensus to delete. That would be a WP:Supervote. --MelanieN (talk) 01:17, 25 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

List of Dead Rising characters[edit]

List of Dead Rising characters (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)

The coverage doesn't warrant a split from the main series article, which can adequately handle this information (and is otherwise relatively empty). The rest of game-specific characters can be handled in individual articles. But as a separate article, there is no summary style need for the split, and the list separately lacks significant coverage from reliable, independent sources (?) to warrant the separation. I've already merged content to the main series article Dead Rising#Protagonists so this list would need to redirect there to preserve attribution unless we delete that info as well—I'm fine with either result. czar 02:40, 9 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Video games-related deletion discussions. czar 02:40, 9 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. czar 02:40, 9 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 02:47, 9 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep: Not only I had had already added more coverage since de-merging it last time, but there's more coverage out there that I haven't added. Such articles include this one I recently found devoted on Chuck Greene from Dead Rising 2, and this one for Nick Ramos from Dead Rising 3. Those sources, along with the ones already in the article should be enough to pass WP:GNG. It's also perfectly acceptable for a split when there's a lot of characters and details for them for a series like Dead Rising, per WP:SIZE. Kokoro20 (talk) 05:58, 9 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. No significant coverage by WP:VG/RS'es, only appears in "Top 10..." characters lists. No origin, no development, no real reception to speak of. soetermans. ^{↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK} 08:03, 12 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The article about Chuck Greene I listed above includes origins and development. Having only sources where they appear in lists do not necessarily negate their notability anyway. Kokoro20 (talk) 10:01, 12 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

That's true, but I don't believe a list of Dead Rising characters by itself meets WP:GNG by this point. I'd rather see a decent Dead Rising article with a sourced, short section on characters, than a huge list that just rehashes the events from the games from the characters' perspective. soetermans. ^{↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK} 11:22, 12 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - Ultimately, most of the sources currently used seem trivial. They certainly don't provide any compelling reason to have a list article over summary style descriptions in the main article. TTN (talk) 00:11, 13 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment: Why are you guys voting "delete" instead of "redirect" or "merge"? Even if you don't agree that this subject is notable enough for its own article, a redirect makes a lot more sense, per WP:CHEAP and WP:ATD-R, as well as to preserve the information for any future potential notability. I could understand going with delete if there was nothing to redirect this to, but there is, in this case, the Dead Rising series article. Kokoro20 (talk) 11:03, 15 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect per the arguments above. And @Kokoro20:, I think that it's mostly implied that spin-off articles like this default to being merged instead of outright removed, but I could be wrong. ~ Dissident93 ^(talk) 08:04, 16 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I think you are wrong about that, @Dissident93:. If no one votes "merge" or "redirect", but just "delete", then it would probably get deleted, regardless if there's a target available. So, why vote "delete" over "redirect" or "merge"? Kokoro20 (talk) 08:40, 16 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I just assumed it was common sense for something that is directly a spin-off article to be redirected, despite calls for "deletion". ~ Dissident93 ^(talk) 08:42, 16 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

How about changing your vote to "redirect" then, @Dissident93:? Kokoro20 (talk) 08:43, 16 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Done, but I still think common sense would apply here anyway. ~ Dissident93 ^(talk) 08:58, 16 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Redirect I don't think we can depend on common sense or implied recommendations in an AfD discussion--it is best to make explicit recommendations based on what one thinks is best. Here the list of protagonists seems verifiable based on sources in this and the parent article. Despite the nom proposing deletion, if the nom has merged content back into the main article, a redirect is needed to preserve attribution, per WP:PROMERGE. --Mark viking (talk) 20:03, 17 August 2016 (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.