Talk:Bailey Quarters

This article was nominated for deletion on 26 January 2010 (UTC). The result of the discussion was keep.

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	Ohio portal This article is supported by WikiProject Ohio (assessed as Low-importance).

Fictional characters

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Fictional characters, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of fictional characters on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Fictional charactersWikipedia:WikiProject Fictional charactersTemplate:WikiProject Fictional charactersfictional character articles

Object to Merger

I object to the merger of this article. Although it certainly could be improved, it is a notable subject matter and reasonably well-sourced. There was absolutely no proposal or discussion of the merger. Fladrif (talk) 21:13, 25 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

WP:Weight provides no support for this deletion whatsoever. It is irrelevant to the question of this redirect. WP:FICT#Articles_that_don't_meet_the_inclusion_criteria would indicate that the deletion and redirection of this article is entirely improper.Fladrif (talk) 23:27, 28 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Articles need more than two sentences of real world information in order to actually be considered notable. See Homer Simpson, Michael Tritter, Clark Kent (Smallville), and Adrian Monk for examples. Unless you believe that you can improve it to the point where it can match at least the two GAs, this doesn't need to be separated from the main article. TTN (talk) 23:41, 28 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Can do. Actually, I think there are at least two sentences of "real world" coverage already. But, adding more is no problem. But not right this minute. Give me a week, and then let's discuss further.Fladrif (talk) 13:34, 29 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Seem to me that this article meets all the hoops you want it to jump through now. Significant "real world" information. Meets the criteria for "good article". Do you disagree? If so, on what basis, and let's see how to address it.Fladrif (talk) 19:33, 4 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There is no basis whatsoever for the re-merger of this article, once again without any proposal nor discussion. I have reverted this merger. Fladrif (talk) 18:53, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Personal Life section

"By the fourth season, their relationship develops into what Smithers characterized as "more adult", giving both characters another dimension to develop,[5] which leads Bailey to ask him out on a date in the second-season opener" Something that doesn't develop until the fourth season can't lead to something that happens in the second season. I'd fix this if I knew what was intended... actually, I can guess... 198.202.137.38 (talk) 21:32, 3 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Surnames as given names

Can whoever keeps inserting trivia about Ryan O'Neal and Peyton Place into the article please stop? It's irrelevant on two grounds: 1) "The Last Word on First Names" says the Bailey character is actually "one of the first female examples to appear on the media" of a surname being used as a female first name. Surnames being used as male first names, on the other hand, has been common for centuries. 2) Ryan O'Neal is not the name of a character on Peyton Place but the name of an actor so even if the book in question didn't specify female first names, the Peyton Place reference would still be irrelevant. Wellington Bay (talk) 22:24, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 7 May 2024

The source clearly shows it is a surname https://www.behindthename.com/name/bailey

What is your request? The article already says "Bailey Quarters was one of the first media examples of the popular naming convention of use of a surname as a female first name" - so the information you are presenting doesn't say anything new or different? Wellington Bay (talk) 18:20, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]