Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Anita Van Buren

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. (non-admin closure) Actualcpscm (talk) 18:07, 8 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Anita Van Buren (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 only uses primary sources, was PRODed for this reason and then made into a redirect as WP:ATD. Has now been restored. Secondary source coverage of the character largely seems to be about the actress S. Epatha Merkerson. AlexandraAVX (talk) 16:44, 1 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Fictional elements and Television. AlexandraAVX (talk) 16:44, 1 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect to List of Law & Order characters. The character does not have enough SIGCOV to meet GNG. QuicoleJR (talk) 19:11, 1 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  I feel that Anita Van Buren deserves a page, she is the longest serving main character and an icon to Law & Order Movieking134 (talk) 23:12, 1 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep I just expanded the lede with a fair amount of detail--longest-running African-American character in TV history, female lieutenant before it happened in real life, "precursor" to Benson, TV critic comment on S5 lineup etc. jengod (talk) 05:17, 2 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep, per User:Jengod, and as improved. There are undoubtedly countless minor characters for whom a Wikipedia article is a questionable proposition. This is not one of them, and it's not close. BD2412 T 02:46, 8 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. This is a healthy, well-written article with ten non-primary RS and ~340 edits over 14 years. There is no valid reason to kill this article. Cheers, Last1in (talk) 13:12, 8 August 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.