Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Andreas Karavis

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. Extraordinary Writ (talk) 16:46, 23 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Andreas Karavis (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:GNG. Article about a fictional character lacks reliable sources. The only sources cited in the article are the author's own works. Tagged as needing additional references since 2012. Geoff | ^{Who, me?} 12:51, 16 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Fictional elements and Poetry. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 13:05, 16 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Even cursory WP:BEFORE shows that this is a Keep with newspaper articles[1][2] (which actually are mentioned or linked from the article), as well as scholarly coverage in journals[3][4][5][6] and in books on literary hoaxes[7] Jahaza (talk) 15:06, 16 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Strong Keep Come on, the sources are there people! The Guardian, The Globe and Mail, let alone the many academic references, papers and pieces about the whole thing. We're WAY beyond WP:GNG already and I haven't even broken a sweat. Silly academic hoax? Check. Influentially, notably so? Check. Best Alexandermcnabb (talk) 15:10, 16 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Some of Solvay's students at it again? So he could use the character? No amount of sources is going to satisfy some people Skysmith (talk) 09:08, 17 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. Poorly referenced article, but also a poor nomination that is an obvious failure of WP:BEFORE. Speedy close, seriously, and WP:TROUT the nom for skipping the BEFORE step. That said, article can be tagged with {{notability}} (well, {{sources exist}} is better), I guess.--_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 09:57, 18 September 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.