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 redirect‎ to Passions#Cast. ✗plicit 23:45, 26 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

List of Passions characters[edit]

List of Passions characters (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)

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

Unsourced list. Pure fancruft. Has been PRODed and endorsed, but PROD was reverted by an IP editor on the basis of being "inaccurate," w/ no other explanation. Proceeding to AfD. Just Another Cringy Username (talk) 22:37, 19 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. Just Another Cringy Username (talk) 22:37, 19 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: Due to the lack of reliable sources establishing WP:Notability. LemonberryPie (talk) 22:56, 19 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Fictional elements and Lists. Shellwood (talk) 22:55, 19 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep a list of X characters is notable if X is notable, this is just a WP:SS spinout article; it could be merged back to the series article, but that makes no sense due to size. Jclemens (talk) 23:35, 19 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  Summary splits are still required to meet notability requirements. Just because something is split does not mean it gets a pass on meeting guidelines.  // Timothy :: talk  19:45, 23 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep! – Deleting would be a horrible idea as soap operas have way too many characters to include in the main article. Worst case scenario it can be *merged* it to main series and then in the summer I will work a lot on sourcing it, but for now please do not delete it. I feel like a lot of soap opera articles are unfairly targeted. DaniloDaysOfOurLives (talk) 23:55, 19 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  Yes, but how do you address the issue of notability? This is not a fan tribute site, nor a directory. There are requirements and guidelines to be met, as outlined in WP:LISTCRITERIA. Your argument sounds more like WP:PPOV or WP:PLEASEDONT. Just Another Cringy Username (talk) 01:21, 20 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Redirect to Passions#Cast - This is pretty much just a cast list, and the main article already has a very detailed cast list of all of the major characters. The characters that are not already listed on the main article's section already appear to just be very minor characters, making this a somewhat redundant spinout article. Many of the blue-linked entries are just circular links back to this same list, and the characters that actually do have independent articles are already also linked to from the main character list on the show's main page, making this not too much use for navigational purposes either. Rorshacma (talk) 01:47, 20 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect to Passions#Cast. There is scope for it to be improved with sourcing. I would suggest for DaniloDaysOfOurLives to work on it in a sandbox/draftspace so that it can be reinstated as an improved article eventually. – Meena • 14:44, 20 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect The content of this article would be way better to include in existing article rather than keeping it as a separate one as I take it. NiftyyyNofteeeee (talk) 10:24, 21 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect to the cast as a better target. Most of this isn't supported by reliable third party sources. I might agree with other editors that some elements could be merged, but very selectively based on reliable sources. Shooterwalker (talk) 22:05, 21 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect to Passions#Cast per above. Article fails LISTN and serves no WP:CLN AOAL role.  // Timothy :: talk  04:01, 22 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect to Passions#Cast per above. There are a few references but I don't think the density is sufficient. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 06:21, 22 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment: I notice the keep votes all focus on the notability of the individual characters, where WP:NLIST recommends judging notability on whether the items are notable as a group. Examining the idea of "group notability" logically justifies the need for a list and avoids the trap of WP:NOTDIRECTORY. I would challenge those who vote "keep" to justify their vote on the basis of notability as a group. On a related note, most of the individual character articles have their own notability challenges, which we may wish to address once this AfD has run its course.Just Another Cringy Username (talk) 20:53, 22 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  I would encourage you to stop WP:badgering. You have already posted a response to one of the keep arguments above. The above comment is unnecessary. Just let a consensus be reached, and I am sure the editor who will close this AfD will look through everything and judge it fairly either way. There is no need to "challenge" editors to provide more explanation for their decisions. Also, individual character articles are not relevant to this discussion, which should be focused on the list up for discussion. Aoba47 (talk) 22:36, 22 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  I'm not badgering anyone. Just Another Cringy Username (talk) 02:38, 23 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Redirect the page is improved since the nomination; it is no longer entirely unsourced and the circular wikilinks for minor characters have been removed. But there is still no prose content whatsoever, and the table on the main article for Passions#Cast covers the same topic better. This is purely an editorial opinion; if articles such as Timmy Lenox were merged here, I would vote keep. Walt Yoder (talk) 19:14, 23 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment The keep votes have still not addressed LISTN or shown sources that this meets LISTN. Keep votes all boil down to ILIKEIT which is an invalid reason to keep an article, or trying to claim the list is notable because mentions exist in sources for some entries. // Timothy :: talk  19:37, 23 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect to Passions#Cast, which has an adequate list of key characters which makes this List of Passions characters redundant in its current form. I've removed my previous comments to not confuse the issue. The circular redirects have been removed and some sources added, but this list needs to be reinvented in the standard character list format, like List of Dynasty (2017 TV series) characters, or List of The Mandalorian characters (Featured List).— TAnthony^Talk 16:26, 25 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect to Passions#Cast.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 14:55, 26 April 2023 (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.