Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Conker (character)

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 Conker (series). Daniel (talk) 11:17, 10 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Conker (character)

[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. The only good source were the criticism of its design from Project Spark, but thats it! GreenishPickle! (🔔) 12:45, 3 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Video games-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 13:30, 3 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 13:51, 3 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Conker (series), as a vast majority of the content and commentary is more about the games/series than the character itself. I'll note, anecdotally, that I do recall a lot of commentary in the 2000s about the change in direction from children's game to a game with adult themes...but even then, I'm not sure if they were talking about the character, or more about the game itself. Probably the latter, but maybe others will find something. Sergecross73 msg me 14:14, 3 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Merge ran into the same problems as Sergecross mentioned: Conker isn't discussed as much as a character as the games around him were.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 17:22, 3 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Merge and Redirect per others. Yeah I couldn't find sourcing based solely around the character. It was mostly the game not the character. Conyo14 (talk) 04:59, 4 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Merge with series – The series and the character together have great notability, the problem in this case is the separate articles. Svartner (talk) 12:33, 4 December 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.