Deletion of Manon Batiste (2nd nomination)

Comment: per coverage granting notability per . Reviews? In context with the game itself? Naturally. But coverage is coverage. Though not all are in-depth, http://pqasb.pqarchiver.com/chicagotribune/access/64817635.html?dids=64817635:64817635&FMT=ABS&FMTS=ABS:FT&type=current&date=Nov+30%2C+2000&author=Dan+Dinello+Special+to+the+Tribune&pub=Chicago+Tribune&desc=WWII+GAME+SALUTES+RESISTANCE+FIGHTERS&pqatl=google ''Chicago Tribune'', http://www.boston.com/news/globe/obituaries/articles/2006/09/21/helene_deschamps_adams_85_daring_french_spy_rescuer_in_wwii/ ''Boston Globe'', http://arstechnica.com/gaming/news/2007/09/game-review-medal-of-honor-airborne-xbox-360.ars ''Ars Technica'', http://nl.newsbank.com/nl-search/we/Archives?p_product=SL&p_theme=sl&p_action=search&p_maxdocs=200&p_topdoc=1&p_text_direct-0=0EB052D24E12A1B7&p_field_direct-0=document_id&p_perpage=10&p_sort=YMD_date:D&s_trackval=GooglePM ''St Louis Post Dispatch'', http://www.realpoor.com/articles/12_Best_Female_Characters_in_Video_Games_a213_f0.html Real Poor http://news.softpedia.com/news/Medal-of-Honor-Underground-Passwords-and-Bonus-Level-GameBoy-Advance-53147.shtml Softpedia, http://reviews.cnet.com/legacy-game-platforms/medal-of-honor-underground/4528-9882_7-30965816-3.html CNet 1, http://reviews.cnet.com/game-boy-advance-games/medal-of-honor-underground/4505-9975_7-30984393.html Cnet 2, http://reviews.cnet.com/legacy-game-platforms/medal-of-honor-underground/4505-9882_7-30965816.html Cnet 3, http://www.netjak.com/review.php/672 Netjak, show coverage since 2000. Not just a blip on the scope. And then there are the numerous http://books.google.com/books?hl=en&ned=us&um=1&q=%22Manon%20Batiste%22&sa=N&tab=np books covering the subject... also in context to the game. Yes, |one need not agree, but per guideline, these show notability and the article meeting the requirements of . With respects to the nominator, that additional sources had not been added since the last AFD was a reason to |fix it through normal editing, not delete it because it was not done within some unrequired and arbitrary |deadline
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG||WP:IDONTLIKEIT||WP:STAND||WP:ATD||WP:DEADLINE)

Comment: The topic is evidently notable as there are numerous high-quality sources for it such as ''A Parents Guide to Playstation Games''.  The renomination seems vexatious per  and 
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Deletion policy (WP:DEL||WP:NOTAGAIN)

Comment: per Wikipedia:Merge and delete|GFDL.  The article has undergone considerable improvement during and since previous AfD.  The significant real-world commentary is presented in multiple reviews of the game.  The article undeniably demonstrates |real-world notability independent of the game in which it is a protagonist, or other games in which it appears. A redirect has been undone by multiple editors, with one editor claiming that notability is not established because the character.   This claim is articulated in the article itself and is substantiated by reliable sources, which conveys notability. There is no compelling rationale to delete this necessary content appropriate spinoff (which consists of significant commentary, and development and reception information). Sincerely
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG)

Comment: The scant development and reception presently in the article isn't enough to justify keeping the article. The development section in fact is composed of one quote which is already placed in the parent's article and which is more about the music anyway. The single sentence of the reception easily fits within the purview of the parent. There are two problematic articles here, not one: Let the story of this single character be told within the not-existing plot section of the parent (which should exist, mind you) and by the person this story is based on. This is a delete based on the article failing ; mind you though, there is a place in the parent article for some of that. 3-500 words should be about right
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:PLOT)

Comment: removed some borderline |attacks.  Let's try to be civil
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:No personal attacks (WP:NPA)