Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lila (Peanuts)

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 Snoopy, Come Home. MBisanz ^talk 04:31, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Lila (Peanuts)

Non-notable fictional character, no reliable sources found. Only appeared in the strip a few times, mostly as unseen. Doesn't seem worth merging. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP)} 22:01, 16 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

keep and merge All named characters who make an actual appearance in a famous comic like that are worth merging. Nobody is likely to defend it as a separate article. Even for t hose who think it might not quite be worth the merging, I'd suggest they consider whether it isn't easier and less contentious to do so than to try to delete--and thu smore in keeping with the common goal of improving the encyclopedia ? DGG (talk) 22:53, 16 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Very minor character, but seems real and WP:N nonetheless. Andy Dingley (talk) 22:55, 16 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
It should be worth noting she was an important character in the movie Snoopy, Come Home.SPNic (talk) 23:04, 16 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Snoopy's original owner and a major character in the Snoopy, Come Home film, clearly notable. RMHED (talk) 00:27, 17 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If she's a major character in that, she should be mentioned in that article - the question here isn't whether she should be mentioned in Wikipedia, but whether she should have her own freestanding article. Pointing out that she appears in a film isn't an argument for her having a separate article, in fact if that is her primary reason for being notable, all the more reason to just mention her in the article about the film and not cover her separately. --Minderbinder (talk) 20:11, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Minor, non-notable character, certainly no significant coverage in reliable sources. The article is some plot tidbits strung together by listing her infrequent appearances. Doctorfluffy (robe and wizard hat) 00:49, 17 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete She's the little trivia-haired girl. She can be merged into the Peanuts minor characters. She rates a mention in the article about Snoopy, and of course is already mentioned in Snoopy, Come Home. The way I view it, she's only the answer to a question that nobody's asking ("You mean Charlie Brown wasn't the original owner?"). Look at the Peanuts template: "Charlotte Braun • Charlie Brown • Sally Brown • Franklin • Frieda • The Great Pumpkin • Kite-Eating Tree • Lila • Little Red-Haired Girl • Marcie • Patty • Peggy Jean • Peppermint Patty • Pig-Pen • Schroeder • Shermy • Snoopy • Snoopy's siblings • Linus van Pelt • Lucy van Pelt • Rerun van Pelt • Violet • Woodstock • Minor characters". There are many memorable characters who became notable outside of the comic strip. Then there are posers, put in there because someone wanted to be the first to give them their own article. Charlotte Braun? Peggy Jean? Shermy? Give me a break. Mandsford (talk) 02:17, 17 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep the page. It is fine the way it is. 68.34.4.143 (talk) 03:24, 17 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom too minor to be noteworthy. JBsupreme (talk) 04:00, 17 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to List of minor characters in Peanuts per ample precedent. faithless (^speak) 04:49, 17 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to List of minor characters in Peanuts. Doesn't seem notable enough for separate article. Gandalf61 (talk) 12:00, 17 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as WP:JNN and WP:PERNOM are not compelling reasons for deletion, but most significantly, the subject is indeed verifiable through published books and given that we're talking about the original owner of one of fiction's most notable dogs, the information is at worst worthy of a merge and redirect, wich would be a discussion for the article's talk page. Sincerely, --A Nobody^{My talk} 15:59, 17 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Not suitable for merger to comic strip character list because, as noted by SPNic, more siginificant in movies than in comic.Hullaballoo Wolfowitz (talk) 20:45, 17 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. No reason has been given for why this information shouldn't be in Wikipedia. How the information is organised , i.e. whether it should be merged somewhere or in a separate article, can be discussed on the article talk page. Phil Bridger (talk) 21:13, 17 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Merge - The character doesn't appear notable enough to deserve their own article but anything regarding the Peanuts comics should be kept Panyd^{The muffin is not subtle} 22:18, 17 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Merge To List of minor characters in Peanuts. Pastor Theo (talk) 00:19, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Merge To List of minor characters in Peanuts. I note that the merge has already happened, so at this point I'm fine with just redirecting to the appropriate part of that article. --Minderbinder (talk) 18:10, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. List of minor characters in Peanuts should be merged itself because it seems to entirely be made up of original research. THE AMERICAN METROSEXUAL 19:44, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

While I agree with the sentiment, it seems to be more based on primary sources, mainly the comic strip itself more than OR. While it's bad to rely too much on primary sources, especially when specific citations to collections of strips, or individual dates for the strips, it isn't OR if you can go back to the primary source and verify the info. --Minderbinder (talk) 20:11, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Merge to List of minor characters in Peanuts. That's what such articles exist for, after all. --Icarus ^(Hi!) 01:47, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Snoopy, Come Home, if there is anything that isn't redundant with the main article. THF (talk) 00:32, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep It took less than a minute to find 60+ books that at least mention this character, at least a few would help here just fine. This article can go into detail less appropriate for a movie article as well and can cover anything not deemed notable enough for the movie article. -- Banjeboi 02:23, 21 January 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.