Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bastila Shan

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 Characters of the Star Wars: Knights of the Old Republic series. Daniel (talk) 18:15, 14 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Bastila Shan

AfDs for this article:

Articles for deletion/Bastila Shan

[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)

Not sure if theres any SIGCOV here. I'm also having hard time of finding sources at google search that mainly talks about the character (I'm not even sure an Inverse source helps her notability). GreenishPickle! (🔔) 12:59, 7 December 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 Video games. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 20:57, 7 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Merge per nom. Looking through it, most of it is relying on lists or odd references. What actually seems to be discussing her, as a character, is minor at best.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 22:55, 9 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Merge per nom. There's some meat here that genuinely is pretty solid, but a lot of it is fluff. Once that's removed, there just barely isn't enough to properly stand on, in my view. Not opposed to this being recreated in the future should more be found, and if more is found in the span of this debate, then I'd be happy to change my vote. Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 23:38, 10 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep or merge There are some truly desperate mentions padding out this article, but it shouldn't subtract from the areas where this character has received more WP:SIGCOV. It's admittedly pretty borderline, but I think the solution would be to clean-up the reception section and cut/summarize the trivial mentions, per WP:ATD. At that point, there can be some discussion about whether to merge. Shooterwalker (talk) 17:48, 13 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.