Max Greevey: If the character is not notable, I suggest a redirect and/or merge to List of Law & Order characters .  Spinixster (chat!) 01:17, 23 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Fictional elements , Science fiction and fantasy ,  and Television .  Spinixster (chat!) 01:17, 23 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect.  There's not much to merge here considering the format of List of Law & Order characters .  Redirect is the best bet.  – MJL ‐ Talk ‐ ☖ 03:11, 23 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect to List of Law & Order characters .  This Looper article was all I could find that wasn't a passing mention, and it doesn't really count towards notability.  Mooonswimmer 10:10, 25 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] @ Mooonswimmer : just letting you know you forgot to sign.  Spinixster (chat!) 08:47, 25 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep Looper did some specific character analysis, but let's see what else is out there.  Daily Express .  We can do even better with Google Scholar hits: Changing the way we think about character change in episodic television series looks very promising, full text is available for "The Representations of Race and Ethnicity on NYPD Blue and Law & Order: An Analysis of the Portrayal of New York City on Crime and Police Drama" in pdf (click Google Scholar link), Morality, metanarratives, and mea culpa: postmodern problems in Law and order mentions "Greevey" twenty times.  This leaves me feeling pretty okay about keeping this one.  Darkfrog24 ( talk ) 00:03, 26 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note that Looper is listed as unreliable in WP:VG/S and Daily Express is also unreliable per WP:RSP .  I'll check the other sources later.  Spinixster (chat!) 00:57, 26 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Okay, here are the other scholarly sources.  I cannot access the first source, so I'd appreciate if someone else can.  Update: I have found the source, and it only briefly mentions the character as Mike Logan's partner.  The second source only briefly mentions and describes the character.  I'd say it's not enough analysis.  Looking at the third source, it seems to only mention Greevey in plot summaries, not much analysis is going on.  Spinixster (chat!) 02:29, 26 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] I believe WP:VG/S only applies to video games.  This article is not about a video game or video game character.  I also cannot access the full text of the first source.   I missed going over sources for questionable articles with you.  Let us chew on them together with delight.   Disagree about "Representations" source, assuming that's the one you meant.  Agree about Daily Express: We can do better.  I cite sources like that one in these discussions not because I'd use them in the article but to get a sense of how ubiquitous/not ubiquitous a character is in the culture.  Darkfrog24 ( talk ) 02:35, 26 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment I observe that the List of Law and Order characters article isn't the kind of character list article that has descriptions, not even short ones.  It's just names, job titles, and reasons they were removed from the show.  I don't think that serves readers coming to Wikipedia to find out which character this is.  Darkfrog24 ( talk ) 02:40, 26 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Even if VG/S only applies to video games, the fact that it is listed as unreliable should raise a few eyebrows.  Note that the discussions for the Looper source also says that it has a churnalism and repurposing problem.  I still think that the "Representations" source only briefly mentions the character.  Aside from the plot summary, there's just 1 short paragraph about the character.  The first source can be accessed via Z-Library .  Spinixster (chat!) 02:45, 26 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect to List of Law & Order characters - Well, Daily Express is definitely unreliable since it's listed as such at WP:RSP .  Looper is better but still not what I would consider a reliable source.  So the only one left is the thesis which alone is not enough to pass the criteria at WP:GNG .  -- Mika1h ( talk ) 20:01, 26 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect per Mika1h.  I don't see enough reliable coverage.  A redirect is a good WP:ATD that allows additional information to be added through a merge.  Shooterwalker ( talk ) 03:46, 27 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.  Please do not modify it.  Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ).  No further edits should be made to this page.

Discussion outcome: redirect