Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Buy More

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 Chuck (TV series)#Series summary. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:24, 9 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Buy More

Buy More (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)

This is a difficult name to search, but the topic seems to fail

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Fictional elements, Television, and Companies. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 13:50, 2 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Merge to
  List of characters in Chuck which is really what this article is about, and which requires a bit of internal organization. character lists of well notable tv series are usually fine as standalone as long as some attempt to address character notability is made. --Masem (t) 14:07, 2 September 2022 (UTC)[reply
  ]
• Redirect to Chuck (TV series)#Series summary as pure plotcruft. I would not redirect it to the character list, as that is also plotcruft. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 17:17, 2 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect to Chuck (TV series)#Series summary. Lightburst (talk) 18:46, 2 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Suitable for redirect to Chuck (TV series)#Series summary. Agree with nom: Article is entirely in-universe plot summary and fails GNG. ---Steve Quinn (talk) 19:13, 2 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect per above. Content seems to be bloated and much of the content is much better split off into whatever pages actually concern that content. Literally the article has very little to do with the actual chain itself and should probably be rewritten before it ever becomes its own separate article again. I think at best
  WP:TNT applies in this case, but if not, a redirect is perfectly fine.—Mythdon (talk • contribs) 07:28, 5 September 2022 (UTC)[reply
  ]
• Redirect per all. Subject does not meet the
  WP:GNG. Shooterwalker (talk) 15:38, 6 September 2022 (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.