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 Keep. Nomination withdrawn, as the situation has changed; see further note below. (non-admin closure) Prhartcom (talk) 05:42, 1 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

It (character) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

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

No references at all. Page is used to describe this character in an in-universe way, entirely from original research. The book is notable, but the character does not meet GNG. All sources that I found discuss the remake of the movie and what actors will be in it. This character is very adequately described at It (novel) in a section just for this character (that section also has no references and is entirely original research). Prhartcom (talk) 20:39, 28 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Withdrawn by nominator. @Tokyogirl79: You know how to rock this AfD. The article now has a References section full of reliable sources! This character actually does have notability. Nice work. One follow-up request: Can you please add a few of those same sources to this article's section: It (novel)#Pennywise/It; as I mentioned earlier, it too is completely unreferenced. All the best, Prhartcom (talk) 05:18, 1 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 03:33, 29 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 03:33, 29 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Redirect to the main article. Even if there are sources mentioning the character, they would be better used to reinforce the novel and film articles. There cannot be much that would establish the character as an independently notable figure. TTN (talk) 18:17, 29 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment: I think that there's likely stuff out there to support the character having its own article. I'm going to refrain from making a definitive argument until I can dig up the sources, but I know I've seen him listed on various "scariest character" lists in reliable sources. The thing to remember here is that most of the sources will likely call him Pennywise, not "It", like in the article "25 Years of Pennywise the Clown" by The Atlantic. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 03:43, 1 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. It's taking some digging since most of the non-remake sources are buried under a ton of remake related work. However I'm finding a lot of sources that discuss the character as its own entity. You're not really going to find a lot of sources that completely separate it from the book or TV series since the two are related, but there are enough where the character is highlighted to where I think it passes. The article still needs a lot of cleanup, though. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 04:38, 1 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Tokyogirl79, nice work! See the note I added above. Prhartcom (talk) 05:22, 1 May 2016 (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.