Deletion of Terry (Fawlty Towers)

Comment: Fictional character that does not meet the |general notability guideline. Additionally, the article is a |plot-only description of a fictional work with no real-world context and lacks #Reliable sources and notability|reliable third-party sources independent of the subject to presume any kind of notability. With no |verifiability, the article is |original research and an unneeded |content fork
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG||WP:PLOT||WP:V||WP:V||WP:OR||WP:CFORK)

Comment: It's useless to assert without proof that there |must be sources out there somewhere, particularly when others have looked and found nothing. This article fails  and  because it is totally unsourced and therefore contains no preservable content
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions (WP:MUSTBESOURCES||WP:N||WP:V)

Comment: per my comments on the talkpage when I removed the  tag. I acknowledge the nominator's concerns, but as I say on the talkpage, ''at worst'' why not just '''merge and redirect''' to Fawlty_Towers#Other_regular_characters_and_themes? I don't involve myself much with these TV show type articles, so don't know the usual treatment of such things (and I'm happy to say he's not a key character), but for heaven's sake compared to many other junk articles around, it's this sort of radical deletionism that's driving away many contributors from WP. Why bother deleting when it's so simple just to make it a redirect? Or do you want to delete that section out of the Fawlty Towers article as well 'for lack of sources'? Give me a break
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Proposed deletion (WP:PROD)

Comment: as  with no outside notability
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Fancruft (WP:CRUFT)