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 List of Azumanga Daioh characters. MBisanz ^talk 17:04, 19 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ayumu Kasuga (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

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

Only one source, which does not appear to be notable and is broken anyway. All other sources are the manga/anime itself. Redirect declined due to one secondary source, but it doesn't look reputable. (This is my favorite character, though. :-P) Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 02:34, 11 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Weak keep The manga can count as a primary source, and the newtype source can be fixed using the wayback machine. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 02:54, 11 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• It needs more than just one secondary source though. You can't build an article entirely out of primary sources. Also, a wayback of the one secondary source shows no mention whatsoever of Azumanga Daioh or this character. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 03:04, 11 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Redirect to List of Azumanga Daioh characters. As much as I think that Azumanga Daioh is one of the more popular and best comedy anime (despite never watching it; after all, I'm a fan of School Rumble), notability for characters is not inherited, and unless I see more sources (Japanese perhaps?) about creation/conception and/or reception, she doesn't need a standalone article. Narutolovehinata5 ^tccsdnew 11:20, 11 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment. Can the other two nominations be merged here? They more or less have the same rationale and are about characters from the same series. Narutolovehinata5 ^tccsdnew 11:20, 11 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Anime and manga-related deletion discussions. — Frankie (talk) 18:00, 12 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. — Frankie (talk) 18:03, 12 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Mediran (t • c) 13:02, 18 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Redirect. Not notable enough in the real world to warrant a standalone article. 1292simon (talk) 09:31, 19 December 2012 (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.