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. Courcelles 21:54, 27 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Seldom Seen Smith (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

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

Fails notability. This is a single character in the book. There is no reason for separate orphaned article. --ARTEST4ECHO (^talk/_contribs) 16:31, 20 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete as there's no indication of this character's wider relevance than in the book. Cordless Larry (talk) 18:59, 20 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 19:39, 20 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 19:39, 20 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Unlikely search term, not suitable for a redirect. I am skeptical whether the work in which this character appears itself meets WP:BK. Jclemens (talk) 05:40, 21 December 2010 (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.