Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Eddie Kaspbrak (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 merge to It (novel). Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 16:05, 15 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Eddie Kaspbrak

[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)

Fails WP:GNG as the depth of coverage is insufficient. Even if it is argued that GNG is met, I believe that, per WP:PAGEDECIDE, and as is the case with all the other characters, this character is best covered only in the book and film articles. I know that AfD should not be a way to address vandalism or content disputes, but this article has been subject to continual edit-warring over the character's relationships in the book vs the second film...covering the character in those book and film articles instead of this half-way house will solve this problem. --Pontificalibus 14:23, 8 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. --Pontificalibus 14:27, 8 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. --Pontificalibus 14:27, 8 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. --Pontificalibus 14:27, 8 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Merge. I would suggest this gets merged into the page for the book. Bebopjohnson (talk) 16:58, 8 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Merge. Not seeing enough to merit stand-alone article, but ping me if better sources are found and/or the reception section is expanded. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 05:43, 10 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Merge to book article. Most of this article is cited with web news pieces on It Chapter Two. Some of these reliable, although a couple use the questionably-reliable Screen Rant and a tabloid, but they're not unique to Eddie and basically fawn over the gay relationship in It Chapter Two. That is not enough to indicate this character should have his own article. I'm debating whether the other Losers characters should have their own pages as well. 👨x🐱 (talk) 20:22, 13 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Merge. Hi, I'm the author of this page. I wrote this 2 years ago when I was still learning about creating pages. As the original author, I'm going to say merge and I'm going to work on it in the sandbox if I have time. I'm a college student now, I wrote the majority of the pages I've created in high school when I simply had more time. But the first couple articles I've written aren't the same standard of quality as my later articles. But that comes with experience, which I definitely didn't have when I began this article. If I wrote it today, there would be more sources, more in depth analysis and it probably would've taken me a while to finish. I believe I wrote this in a week if my memory serves correctly. Also I'm tired of seeing the edit wars with this page. It's a fictional character guys, it doesn't matter. SeanTheYeti452

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.