Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Edward the Blue Engine

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 redirect to Thomas & Friends. Or elsewhere: consensus is to redirect, but the discussion isn't clear where to. Sandstein 07:51, 15 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Edward the Blue Engine

[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)

The coverage (references, external links, etc.) does not seem sufficient to justify this article passing Wikipedia:General notability guideline and the more detailed Wikipedia:Notability (fiction) requirement. WP:BEFORE did not reveal any significant coverage on Gnews, Gbooks or Gscholar. At best this can be redirected to the List of Thomas & Friends narrow-gauge engines. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 05:13, 8 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 05:13, 8 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 05:13, 8 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to appropriate list. I've noticed that there are no good RS for this article while patrolling edits. William Avery (talk) 08:32, 8 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete If we lack good reliable sources, we should not have the article. Wikipedia is not Wikia, although it virtually allowed itself to be made into such prior to 2008.John Pack Lambert (talk) 12:43, 8 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect because the topic seems to fail our notability criteria. Also, even if notability is met, editorially it is better to combine this material with that on the other characters. If I remember rightly (over 60 years) Edward was the main protagonist in the first story in the first book of The Railway Series and later there was a book entitled Edward the Blue Engine so maybe notability could be demonstrated – I can't be bothered to look. Are there good reliable sources? Yes, there are plenty, both primary and secondary – books, films, television programmes, but these are in-universe and not independent so do not contribute to notability. List of Thomas & Friends narrow-gauge engines would not be a good redirect target because Edward was not characterised as narrow-gauge – List of characters in The Railway Series would be appropriate. Thincat (talk) 16:09, 8 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I find it difficult to see how he is notable outside of people who properly know the show well. I'm going to say Redirect for now, but I might come back and change my mind. Foxnpichu (talk) 19:53, 8 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect per the above, Edward is notable only within the context of the series and so directing readers to List of characters in The Railway Series#Edward (Number 2) is most appropriate. Thryduulf (talk) 12:17, 10 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Strong Keep I see plenty of Google Scholar results for "Edward the Blue Engine". I think you're just not looking heard enough (or at all, really). - Scarpy (talk) 21:03, 12 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- WP:GOOGLEHITS which generally yields 99% of mentions in passing and other bad hits is not a strong argument. Which sources are reliable and discuss this character in-depth? --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 07:47, 13 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  - Most of those sites are non-reliable and/or only mention him in passing. Doesn't seem like enough in my eyes. Foxnpichu (talk) 10:07, 14 October 2020 (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.