Deletion of List of The Secret Circle characters

Comment: Notability for the list is derived from the notability of the series, which the nominator admits has aired on a major network, so  does not apply as the show is ''already'' notable.  Yes, it's kind of early for there to be a separate list of characters, but not so early that deleting it makes sense.  Oh, and while OR isn't a reason to delete an entire article (just offending content), the brief character sketches appear to be sourceable to the primary source itself, rather than veering off into fanwank territory. Much better to expand it
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:CRYSTAL)

Comment: WP:LISTN|Notability guidelines apply to the inclusion of stand-alone lists and the characters of this one have not been discussed as a group or set by independent reliable sources, so the topic of the list does not meet the |general notability guideline. Furthermore, the content of the article is a |summary-only description of a fictional work, making the article fall into WP:!|what Wikipedia is not and, thus, not suitable for the criteria of |appropriate topics for lists. The list itself is an |unnecessary split of The Secret Circle (TV series), which has an article size of 13.5 KB, below the |recommended article size, which would be the only justified reason to split this type content. As such  and as the content is barely referenced, I believe that deletion is the best alternative
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG||WP:PLOT||WP:SALAT||WP:AVOIDSPLIT||WP:SIZERULE)

Comment: notability of a character list is not inherited from the parent work of fiction. This article is almost entirely plot summary, and its content is already adequately covered in the main article about the series. These kinds of articles - where plot summary is taken, rearranged and repackaged in a multitude of different ways to make a bunch of redundant plot summary articles - are a problem on Wikipedia, and are not how to build an encyclopedia. They are contrary to our |content forking guideline, and to the spirit of  in that they cause disproportionate coverage of the work of fiction and artificially inflate its apparent notability. Our |verifiability policy and |notability guideline discourage articles like this by calling for reliable independent sources that cover the subject- if you want an article on a list of characters, you need sources about the ''list'' of characters. The work of fiction itself, and sources that cover it broadly rather than focusing on the list of characters, do not suffice
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Mirrors and forks (WP:FORK||WP:UNDUE||WP:V||WP:N)