Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Helen Graham (The Tenant of Wildfell Hall)

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 The Tenant of Wildfell Hall. Star Mississippi 15:23, 2 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Helen Graham (The Tenant of Wildfell Hall)

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

)

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

No need for a separate article. Almost all of it is simply a regurgitation of what the novel says about her. Clarityfiend (talk) 08:06, 22 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Fictional elements and Literature. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 08:14, 22 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: I agree with the nominator that most of this information is already on the page for The Tenant of Wildfell Hall. I searched for articles on Helen Graham and could only find one source that primarily focused on her rather than the novel as a whole. GraceEnglishMajor (talk) 19:13, 22 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Reply: Following up on this, the source I found was De Dios Torralbo Caballero, Juan. “Anne Brontë’s Helen and Her Atypical Insuborination: ‘A Will of Her Own.’” Romanian Journal of English Studies, vol. 16, no. 1, 2019, pp. 16–24., https://doi.org/10.1515/rjes-2019-0003. GraceEnglishMajor (talk) 00:36, 23 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect. She's the main character of a famous feminist novel, and I'm confident a standalone could be written for her. But no one has done that in ten years. The only significant edit to this article is the one that created it. I agree with the nom's statement; I'd just have
WP:BLAR'd it. I don't see any reason to delete it outright. -- asilvering (talk) 03:06, 24 February 2023 (UTC)[reply
]

Redirect
WP:PRESERVE in case more sources are found Dronebogus (talk) 14:56, 24 February 2023 (UTC)[reply
]

Merge and Delete — poorly named, so it is an unlikely search. Suspicious lack of references. Seems more of a page to hold a couple of templates full of complex relationship details, also with no references.
WP:OR.
William Allen Simpson (talk) 16:32, 1 March 2023 (UTC)[reply
]

Redirect a single source and not enough content to justify a standalone article. Mostly redundant with what's already in the novel's article. Rkieferbaum (talk) 15:23, 2 March 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.