Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Black Canary (Dinah Drake)

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 merge‎ to Black Canary. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:08, 16 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Black Canary (Dinah Drake)

[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)

Plot summary unnecessarily split from Black Canary where I suggest this should be merged as a SOFTDELETE option. As a stand-alone article, this fails WP:GNG. No reception or analysis section, just fictional character biography (including stuff like "Powers and abilities: Dinah Drake also rides a motorcycle." - color me impressed) and a list of media appearances. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 06:35, 2 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Fictional elements, Science fiction and fantasy, and Comics and animation. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 06:35, 2 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 06:35, 2 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - Let this page stay. She was to be separated from the other versions of Black Canary just like how other characters who use the same alias have their own separate pages. Plus, @Jhenderson777: created this page to keep the other page from being overcrowded. --Rtkat3 (talk) 16:42, 5 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Uh, what? Those arguments may work for fandom (fan wiki), but our articles have to meet GNG and similar criteria. Which sources support stand-alone notability of this character? _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 06:32, 6 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:33, 9 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Merge to Black Canary. I would even support a bold heading in the section. But neither article is long enough or distinct enough to warrant separation. It is just an unneeded split that makes navigation harder for WP readers. If someone has a valid rationale for separate articles, please notify me. ‡ El cid, el campeador ^talk 13:15, 9 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Black Canary - Splitting this into three different articles really does not accomplish anything except, as El cid, el campeador mentioned, make it harder to navigate for readers. This is a pretty clear WP:NOPAGE situation where the context provided by having both main "Black Canary" characters covered on the same page just makes more sense. Rorshacma (talk) 00:09, 10 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect or merge as WP:REDUNDANTFORK. The same topic is being covered in three articles, which makes the topic harder to follow, and unnecessarily complicated. Doesn't have WP:SIGCOV as separate topics. Shooterwalker (talk) 17:42, 13 August 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.