Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hawk (birdman)

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 to Buck Rogers in the 25th Century (TV series). Courcelles 04:32, 1 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hawk (birdman)

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

Lack of independent sources to justify notability and should be deleted alongside Dr. Theopolis and Twiki Dwanyewest (talk) 01:48, 24 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comment While I can't claim enough knowledge of deletion standards regarding television shows to put in a strong vote, the inclusion of fringe characters from every television show does not seem encyclopedic. Nwlaw63 (talk) 04:11, 24 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The issue is really whether to keep as an independent article or merge to a parent subject. Deletion is not an appropriate outcome for a significant character in such a popular and enduring TV series. Candleabracadabra (talk) 14:03, 24 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I am willing to accept this article being merged into Buck Rogers in the 25th Century (TV series) as a compromise but it doesn't have any independent sources to justify its notability as a solo article. Dwanyewest (talk) 14:36, 24 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:59, 24 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:00, 24 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:00, 24 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science fiction-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:01, 24 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

So just merge it already and we really don't need to be at AfD for this unless someone has undone your merge. Be WP:BOLD and do the right thing, and someone else will revert if they disagree, and then we can come here and discuss it. Jclemens (talk) 06:05, 25 August 2013 (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.