Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Miraz

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, consensus is that with the source quoted by Fbv65edel character is notable. Davewild (talk) 12:33, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Miraz

The article is about a non-notable character from the Chronicles of Narnia series, and as it has no notability or references, is just an in-universe plot repetition that is duplicative and should be deleted. Judgesurreal777 (talk) 00:26, 25 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Very important character in Prince Caspian. Happy Holidays!! Malinaccier (talk) 00:57, 25 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Villian of Prince Caspian, which is probably notable enough. It does need to be rewritten, and needs references, but those don't call for deletion. Anyway, if it is deleted, someone will just recreate it this spring when the Disney movie is released. LloydSommerer (talk) 01:42, 25 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Malinaccier and Lloyd. Needs help, but no reason to delete. -Mastrchf91- 03:27, 25 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - Please focus on the nominating rationale and problems, because anyone can say something is notable,, and what I am asking for is proof of actual real world notability, such as C.S. Lewis describing how he came up with Miraz, or how the character changed in the course of writing the books, stuff like that. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Judgesurreal777 (talk • contribs) 03:58, 25 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep The nomination suggests that the character is non-notable; in fact, he is the antagonist from one of the books in the series. He is symbolic of a few things: for example, I can cite Companion to Narnia by Paul F. Ford which relates Miraz, the father figure to Caspian, to parentlessness representative in Lewis' early life, as well as tyranny in government. The article of course needs work but there are no grounds to delete. --Fbv65e del — t — c // 04:42, 25 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep for now, and encourage Fbv to add his third-party source. As someone mentioned, if this is deleted or merged now, it will surely be re-created when the film is released, and I suspect there will probably be more sources to use then. *** Crotalus *** 11:40, 25 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
'Keep or merge at a stretch - notable character in notable book. cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 11:48, 25 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, fictional character seemingly without notability outside of the Narnia universe. Lankiveil (talk) 12:29, 26 December 2007 (UTC).[reply]
Delete. No notability shown. Being a main villain for a notable book, doesn't automatically make the character article notable. Relevant content should be in the Prince Caspian article only. RobJ1981 (talk) 18:46, 28 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Merge into Prince Caspian. There is nothing in the article to indicate notability outside the book. Pagra shtak 19:11, 28 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep the reference cited by Fbv is sufficient for real world notability. DGG (talk) 20:19, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fictional characters-related deletion discussions. -- -- pb30<talk> 06:48, 30 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. -- -- pb30<talk> 06:49, 30 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep or merge. Being a major character of such a major book series makes me believe there's likely to be some real-world information to be said about this character. If, when all said and done, the amount of information can easily live on a list, then do that, but if it is enough for an article, then that's great. In either case, I don't see total deletion as a good solution. -- Ned Scott 06:55, 30 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: the source found by Fbv65edel is sufficient to demonstrate notability, and contra Judgesurreal777's comment literary analysis of the character is enough. —Quasirandom (speak) 15:16, 30 December 2007 (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.