Misplaced Pages

:Articles for deletion/Finrod Felagund: Difference between revisions - Misplaced Pages

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
< Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion Browse history interactively← Previous editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 16:45, 1 May 2016 editSandstein (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Administrators188,250 edits opinion: delete← Previous edit Revision as of 16:46, 1 May 2016 edit undoSandstein (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Administrators188,250 edits amend opinionNext edit →
Line 12: Line 12:
*'''Redirect''' as it's still questionable for its own article. ] ] 06:02, 29 April 2016 (UTC) *'''Redirect''' as it's still questionable for its own article. ] ] 06:02, 29 April 2016 (UTC)
*'''Keep'''. The "parent" is already notable. There is more than enough material here to justify a split off the parent, even ignoring the other points raised. Where exactly would you redirect this? -- ] 13:29, 1 May 2016 (UTC) *'''Keep'''. The "parent" is already notable. There is more than enough material here to justify a split off the parent, even ignoring the other points raised. Where exactly would you redirect this? -- ] 13:29, 1 May 2016 (UTC)
*'''Delete.''' Opinions above only assert the existence of relevant sources, but do not cite them, and therefore should be discounted. No indication in the article of the sort of third-party coverage required for notability. Contains only in-universe content, contrary to ], another indication of non-notability. <small><span style="border:1px solid black;padding:1px;">]</span></small> 16:45, 1 May 2016 (UTC) *'''Delete.''' Contains only in-universe content, contrary to ]. While it is conceivable judging from the above that a policy-compliant article could be written, as it is the article would need a total rewrite from an out-of-universe perspective and can therefore be safely deleted. <small><span style="border:1px solid black;padding:1px;">]</span></small> 16:46, 1 May 2016 (UTC)

Revision as of 16:46, 1 May 2016

Finrod Felagund

Finrod Felagund (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This fictional has no WP:RS reliable sources which WP:V verifies its general notability per the WP:GNG and WP:NFICT. Thus this subject is an unsuitable topic for a standalone article. This character only has in-universe notability as no sources support real-world notability. AadaamS (talk) 14:26, 16 April 2016 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. GabeIglesia (talk) 15:21, 16 April 2016 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 17:40, 19 April 2016 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America 11:15, 23 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Keep. A major figure in the Tolkien legendarium, and the subject of significant critical attention. Note the dozens of Google Scholar hits and such commentary in (non-fannish) academic books like this one , to say nothing of popular commentary. No doubt there's Tolkien cruft that might be pruned, but this is an example of an article on a significant character that merits expansion. The Big Bad Wolfowitz (aka Hullaballoo). Treated like dirt by administrators since 2006. (talk) 21:44, 23 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Redirect as it's still questionable for its own article. SwisterTwister talk 06:02, 29 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Keep. The "parent" is already notable. There is more than enough material here to justify a split off the parent, even ignoring the other points raised. Where exactly would you redirect this? -- RM 13:29, 1 May 2016 (UTC)
  • Delete. Contains only in-universe content, contrary to WP:WAF. While it is conceivable judging from the above that a policy-compliant article could be written, as it is the article would need a total rewrite from an out-of-universe perspective and can therefore be safely deleted.  Sandstein  16:46, 1 May 2016 (UTC)
Categories: