Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kimi Finster (2nd nomination)

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. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 00:33, 4 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Kimi Finster

Kimi Finster (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log

)

Delete or Merge. I don't see anywhere of more than one character in SpongeBob SquarePants or The Fairly OddParents having their own pages. If the result is merge, merge to List of Rugrats characters. Marcus2 (talk) 15:37, 27 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete because it'll likely get undone by a slobbering fanboy if redirected. There are no out of universe sources for the character. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ^{(Many otters • One bat • One hammer)} 16:48, 27 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Merge to a list of Rugrats characters. This and the other nominations around it all belong in a list of Rugrats characters (as many movies, movie series, and TV series have such lists. I don't see why Rugrats wouldn't qualify for such a list).Tyrenon (talk) 20:24, 27 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep and add sourcing and commentary. Merge as a last resort, it seems large enough for a standalone article. While there are no standalone
  Strawman fallacy. --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) (talk) 20:38, 27 May 2009 (UTC)[reply
  ]
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. -- TexasAndroid (talk) 22:04, 28 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep She was in a successful movie($103 million at theaters) and is significant part of a notable cartoon series. There is enough content to warrant her own article, so she should have one. Dream Focus 01:45, 29 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - Most of these are notable, and some aren't. I don't have the time, inclination, or lexisnexis account needed to turn them into GAs, but it's possible. - Peregrine Fisher (talk) (contribs) 05:41, 30 May 2009 (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.