Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Janet Dillon
no argument or rationale for deletion offered.  If there is "too much plot," then trim it or add more real world context to balance it.  The same with in-universe perspective: .  Either this should be kept as a standalone article (which the references might support) or it should be merged to a character list.  In either case, deletion is not the proper outcome, and this AFD should not have been started per .  The nom's comments about soap opera article editors are inappropriate; one might more easily comment on the conduct and intent of an editor who has done nothing recently but mass-nominate soap opera-related articles for deletion without any attempt at correcting problems by editing or merging, etc., through normal editing and discussion, which tends towards disruption in that it is contrary to both deletion and editing policy, and the disparaging comments about the subject and its editors unfortunately suggest bad faith on his part.  Unsupported comments such as "The current sources may not be the right ones to choose" and "I don't know if the article violates copyrights" further tell us that the nom is assuming the worst but not doing any work to investigate or verify
— User:Postdlf, 15:41, 12 October 2011 (UTC)
Stance: keep
Cited policy: WP:SOFIXIT||WP:ATD (Wikipedia:Be bold)