Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Anna Green (Hollyoaks)

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.

Anna Green (Hollyoaks)

Anna Green (Hollyoaks) (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)

Lacking in sources since 2007, article only has two sources. One of the sources is

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Fictional elements and Television. (Oinkers42) (talk) 06:13, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect to List of Hollyoaks characters; otherwise, this may clearly be Fandom territory. --Slgrandson (How's my egg-throwing coleslaw?) 06:35, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect. Unless the reception is expanded and/or analysis section added, this is a clear
  WP:GNG failure. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 06:50, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply
  ]
• Comment - Noted Slgrandson and Piotrus' concerns - I will address them and work on the article.Rain the 1 10:18, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment - I have made steady progress with the expansion so far. I have found a bunch of other sources from the archives that I will use to continue improving the article further over the coming days.Rain the 1 21:15, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Strong keep per
  WP:HEY. RT1 has worked hard in massively improving and sourcing the article. There is now in depth development and reception and multiple sources showing notability and in depth coverage. DaniloDaysOfOurLives (talk) 16:52, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply
  ]
• Keep: I agree that Raintheone has made significant improvements to the article. Keep per
  WP:HEY. Toughpigs (talk) 17:05, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply
  ]
• Keep: As User:Toughpigs said above, significant improvements have been made and I think the article passes WP:GNG. – JuneGloom07 Talk 21:54, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - I have been working on the article since the nomination to address the concerns mentioned above. Given what I have added, the time of nomination vs now - I think there is enough sourced content for an article. There is real world content concerning casting, character creation, characterisation, plots with real world coverage, her role within the show is explained and reception has been added. Per WP:HEY it does not match the nominators reasons for deletion, it passes WP:GNG and I have used various sources meeting WP:SIGCOV. I feel keeping is the better decision here.Rain the 1 17:54, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep 🥒Greenish Pickle!🥒 (🔔) 02:40, 27 April 2024 (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.