Appendix talk:Fictional characters
- Also note that the page has been deleted, apparently without any attempt to transwiki. -- Visviva 18:25, 3 October 2007 (UTC)
What belongs here?
The problem with this is that it is so open-ended. There should be criteria that give guidelines about who does and does not belong in a dictionary. The simple "X is a character in novel Y by author Z" is not enough. One important criterion might be the migration of the charcter into other aspects of the language. The contributor should at least attempt some justification for why this character is being included. Eclecticology 20:39, 4 Jan 2005 (UTC)
- Another problem with this list is that it encourages the creation of encyclopaedia articles about people (and animals). Wiktionary is not an encyclopaedia. Articles about names (i.e. about individual given names and family names) are fine, as are articles about character names that have become idioms (rumpelstiltskin is also an idiom, for example). But articles about particular people and animals that have those names are not. Several of the redlinks currently on this list do not belong as dictionary articles. Uncle G 02:28, 11 May 2005 (UTC)
- Eclecticology is has been too restrictive when it comes to video game characters. There are some that have been deleted, but really belong here. There are some unjustly deleted video game character links. Some of these characters are popular enough to be put back in on the list. Tedius Zanarukando 03:04, 11 August 2005 (UTC)