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. ✗plicit 10:16, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Sarah Bryant (Virtua Fighter) (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)

Was deleted through merge just 2 weeks ago. The sourcing in the reception section is brief mentions, no in-depth coverage. Editor insists on recreating article just weeks after last close. Fails WP:GNG. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 10:12, 29 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep: The sources provide significant coverage, with one going into full detail on the character, and the other sources are from print, including two full page articles dedicated to the character. The main argument is more "It was AfD'd recently", which was for a reception section that's not even utilized in this new article save for two references, one of which wasn't even cited properly.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 10:17, 29 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep I knew there were magazines on Sarah, but I decided to vote merge on the last afd since the article was a little bit awful, I guess per WP:TNT. Right now, the article is in good shape, thanks to Kung Fu Man. GlatorNator (ᴛ) 10:32, 29 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Fictional elements and Video games. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 10:45, 29 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect to List of Virtua Fighter characters#Sarah Bryant and restore section there. Simply saying "this magazine mentioned her" does not demonstrate there is substantive discussion on the character. Nor was any attempt made to gain consensus there before recreating the article, suggesting it was largely motivated by a desire to "push through" a standalone page, with the edit summary expressing knowledge that it was likely non-notable and creating it anyway. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 12:24, 29 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - the coverage presented here is much stronger than prior versions. It focuses more on her impact in the series and reception to being a female character rather than the silly "Top 27 boobs in gaming" nonsense that often occupies these sorts of articles. Sergecross73 msg me 14:25, 29 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. I am satisfied that the work put into the article is adequate to address any notability issues. - Cukie Gherkin (talk) 21:05, 29 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Strong keep: A no-brainer right here. I knew Sarah Bryant was notable, was why I !voted keep in the previous two AFDs, and Kung Fu Man has proved me right, hence I consider this one a "strong keep." I get the previous AFD was very recent, but it seems most, if not all, of issues that got it sent to AFD last time have been addressed. MoonJet (talk) 03:12, 30 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep: Sourcing proves notability, which makes the recency of the latest AfD irrelevant. Merko (talk) 00:16, 5 May 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.