Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Monday Bandele

:{{la|Monday Bandele}} ([{{fullurl:Monday Bandele|wpReason={{urlencode: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Monday Bandele}}&action=delete}} delete]) – (View AfD)(View log)

The prod of this article was removed by a serial deprodder, but I find the original prodder's concern, which follows, to be valid.

A search for references failed to find significant coverage in reliable sources to comply with notability requirements. This included web searches for news coverage, books, and journals, which can be seen from the following links:
[http://www.google.com/search?&as_eq=wikipedia&as_epq={{urlencode:{{SUBPAGENAME}}}} {{SUBPAGENAME}}] – [http://news.google.com/archivesearch?&as_src=-newswire+-wire+-presswire+-PR+-press+-release&as_epq={{urlencode:{{SUBPAGENAME}}}} news], [http://books.google.com/books?&as_brr=0&as_epq={{urlencode:{{SUBPAGENAME}}}} books], [http://scholar.google.com/scholar?as_epq={{urlencode:{{SUBPAGENAME}}}} scholar]
Consequently, this article is about a subject that appears to lack sufficient notability ThemFromSpace 01:56, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

• Delete Fails notibility and is written in-universe fan fictionish. I don't think it could be sourced either. Kurt (talk) 04:34, 24 June 2009 (UTC)
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. -- TexasAndroid (talk) 12:08, 24 June 2009 (UTC)
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. -- TexasAndroid (talk) 12:08, 24 June 2009 (UTC)
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. -- TexasAndroid (talk) 12:08, 24 June 2009 (UTC)
• Delete as nonnotable, even if what is said is true and can be proven via reliable sources this wouldn't be notable enough for an article per WP:NOT - Note that deprodder was not a valid editor - sock of banned editor doing block evasion, all actions are invalid and would have been reverted, meaning this would likely have been deleted without need for an AFD. DreamGuy (talk) 19:14, 24 June 2009 (UTC)
• Merge to suitable combination articles with about a paragraph each, midway between this over-detailed article, and the bare list at Dream Team characters. There's a compromise solution to this. I gather that this is a major series, and therefore people would reasonably look for information about the significant characters. Such information is appropriate for an encyclopedia like Wikipedia. As for whoever deprodded it, I think most reasonable admins would have merged, not deleted, at the end of the relevant period. DGG (talk) 19:23, 24 June 2009 (UTC)
• Merge per reasonable WP:ATD comments by DGG. Put suitabe informations where readers would expect to find it. However, the derogatory term "serial deprodder" is not neccessary or helpful to this discussion. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 21:04, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

: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.