Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Schlock Mercenary characters

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. RL0919 (talk) 06:48, 9 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

List of Schlock Mercenary characters

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

Page has no secondary sources and most of it counts as original research. Not a very active user (talk) 04:36, 2 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. Not a very active user (talk) 04:36, 2 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Science fiction-related deletion discussions. Not a very active user (talk) 04:36, 2 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Webcomics-related deletion discussions. Not a very active user (talk) 04:36, 2 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. Not a very active user (talk) 04:36, 2 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete huge sprawling mass of fancruft with no out-of-universe notability or secondary sources. The comic is clearly notable (especially given the long-standing negative relationship between webcomics and Wikipedia) but it's clear that there is little encyclopedic content on the characters. Summarizing the key characters on the main article should be sufficient; leave the rest to fanworks. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 07:03, 2 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - The main article is capable of handling descriptions of the characters. Merging seems pointless because a new summary would be better than trying to trim all that down. TTN (talk) 10:57, 2 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – I would say that all of it is original research. I agree that this content isn't suitable for the main article either, and summarizing the key characters there should really be sufficient. We have no reason to try to replace the Schlock Mercenary wiki, after all, which can describe these characters in much more in-universe detail. ~Maplestrip/Mable (chat) 11:59, 2 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per above. I wish to add into two points: (1) there are no reliable sources but rather wikis and blogs, and (2) It's a huge and incoherent list that contains dozens of entries almost of of which are non-notable (there's a claim of 11 protagonists, which is absurd on its face). Bearian (talk) 15:22, 7 October 2019 (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.