Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ms. Demeanor

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. Cirt (talk) 18:30, 23 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ms. Demeanor

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

A minor character without any reliable third person sources or notability it should be merged or deleted

Dwanyewest (talk) 21:17, 14 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This AfD nomination was incomplete (missing step 3). It is listed now. DumbBOT (talk) 14:32, 15 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - There's no indication that this character, who appeared in a cartoon that was only broadcast for 1 year, is notable. --Griseum (talk) 15:46, 15 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Entirely original research based on primary sources. Pcap ping 05:59, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
merge adequately the information is verifiable, being based as it should be on the fiction itself, & is therefore not Original Research. DGG ( talk ) 05:51, 19 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete sub-trivial character, lacks real world notability. JBsupreme (talk) 08:13, 19 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'm saying that the topic fails to satisfy the requirements of the GNG. The article seems nothing more than a platform for a plot summary of the episodes. A smerge to C.O.P.S. is possible, I guess; but what's the point of merging more unsourced content to an article that itself lacks any cited sources?

Dwanyewest (talk) 13:43, 19 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete- Excessive plot summary about a trivial character from a fairly low notability cartoon. No reliable sources, so we should not have an article on it. No sources of any kind means that there isn't even anything that can legitimately be merged. Reyk _YO! 08:26, 23 February 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.