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 Parker Pyne Investigates. Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 14:16, 30 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Parker Pyne (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

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

No sources, no indication of importance. Opalzukor (talk) 06:55, 23 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 07:44, 23 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete, then redirect to Parker Pyne Investigates. Regardless of notability, there is no content worth merging. The article contains original research, including SYNTH and speculative material. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 13:42, 23 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Procedural keep - Fails to cite a legitimate rationale for deletion, per WP:NEXIST and WP:ARTN. If anything, AfDs need to provide an indication of unimportance (or at least, justify a criteria for deletion) but I'm not seeing that here. Likewise, original research is typically solved with removals and rewrites per WP:NOTCLEANUP. Darkknight2149 18:58, 23 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - Topic fails to establish notability per WP:GNG. Even should there be some older print-only sources discussing the character, I find it doubtful that it would need coverage outside of the context of the main article. TTN (talk) 20:40, 23 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect to Parker Pyne Investigates: Nothing is referenced, no reception, the only part that has some value is list of appearances, but again, no references. No objection so soft deletion, maybe someone will want to dig something from the history here one day? _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 06:07, 27 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect to Parker Pyne Investigates The character essentially only appears in this collection of stories. The character does not have the same level of coverage as other Christie detectives; I don't think there is enough for the character to pass GNG on his own. Rhino131 (talk) 11:35, 27 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete and redirect as failing to establish notability per WP:GNG. No references, no reception, no additional research can be found. Shooterwalker (talk) 15:55, 29 October 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.