Misplaced Pages

:Articles for deletion/Finarfin: 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 22:15, 14 January 2020 editChiswick Chap (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Page movers, New page reviewers, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers296,322 edits Finarfin: redirect target← Previous edit Revision as of 22:20, 14 January 2020 edit undoChiswick Chap (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Page movers, New page reviewers, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers296,322 edits Finarfin: noteNext edit →
Line 13: Line 13:
*'''Delete''' Finarfin is only ] in a few '']'' articles. &#8213;]&nbsp;] 04:41, 8 January 2020 (UTC) *'''Delete''' Finarfin is only ] in a few '']'' articles. &#8213;]&nbsp;] 04:41, 8 January 2020 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' we do not have enough indepth sources to show notability. The detail and citation and analysis in the nomination show that the claim that these LotR related deletion nominations are not being done with undue speed or vigor. On the other hand the mass creation of so many of these articles so early in the history of Misplaced Pages, many even minor Tolkien related articles, like ], were in the first 100,000 articles on Misplaced Pages, was unjustified and is one of the causes of the dysfunction of Misplaced Pages from its creation to the present. We need to rid Misplaced Pages of Silmarillion cruft.] (]) 21:53, 8 January 2020 (UTC) *'''Delete''' we do not have enough indepth sources to show notability. The detail and citation and analysis in the nomination show that the claim that these LotR related deletion nominations are not being done with undue speed or vigor. On the other hand the mass creation of so many of these articles so early in the history of Misplaced Pages, many even minor Tolkien related articles, like ], were in the first 100,000 articles on Misplaced Pages, was unjustified and is one of the causes of the dysfunction of Misplaced Pages from its creation to the present. We need to rid Misplaced Pages of Silmarillion cruft.] (]) 21:53, 8 January 2020 (UTC)
::: {{U|Johnpacklambert}}: Whatever the merits here, redirects are cheap and they are useful to readers searching for help, even if only brief. I suggest we point this at ]. It may be worth saying that while many of us may feel the Silmarillion to be far less interesting than the Lord of the Rings, it gets some 600,000 hits a year, so our readers definitely consider it significant, and its characters worthy of attention. We should handle those requests gracefully. ] (]) 22:20, 14 January 2020 (UTC)
*'''Delete''': a minor character in a minor work.--] (]) 09:17, 9 January 2020 (UTC) *'''Delete''': a minor character in a minor work.--] (]) 09:17, 9 January 2020 (UTC)
*'''Redirect''' to ]. ] (]) 04:23, 12 January 2020 (UTC) *'''Redirect''' to ]. ] (]) 04:23, 12 January 2020 (UTC)

Revision as of 22:20, 14 January 2020

Finarfin

New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

Finarfin (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)

Prod contested by User:Ceyockey as "this is not a non-controversial edit and should be taken through AfD." This figure fails WP:GNG. This article receives some mentions in reliable secondary sources, but not the sort of mentions that would allow us to build an article about the character. One Mythlore article mentions Finarfin three times, all in the context of the etymology of the Elvish word "fin." Another article in the same journal mentions him seven times, but in the context of the "sons of Finarfin" or the "house of Finarfin", communicating us no real information about Finarfin. In fact, many of the mentions to Finarfin are in this manner, and the others are too brief and in-passing for us to build an article about this figure without relying too much on primary sources. Hog Farm (talk) 03:30, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. Hog Farm (talk) 03:30, 8 January 2020 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Science fiction and fantasy-related deletion discussions. Hog Farm (talk) 03:30, 8 January 2020 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. Hog Farm (talk) 03:30, 8 January 2020 (UTC)
  • Comment: the reason I deemed this to be unsuitable for PROD was a) the number of editors involved in composing it and b) the observation that other characters had gone through AfD, albeit they were by and large deleted through the AfD process. I did not want to judge this a case of WP:SNOW, which is why I de-prod'd the article. --User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 03:45, 8 January 2020 (UTC)
  • Delete Finarfin is only briefly mentioned in a few Mythlore articles. ―Susmuffin  04:41, 8 January 2020 (UTC)
  • Delete we do not have enough indepth sources to show notability. The detail and citation and analysis in the nomination show that the claim that these LotR related deletion nominations are not being done with undue speed or vigor. On the other hand the mass creation of so many of these articles so early in the history of Misplaced Pages, many even minor Tolkien related articles, like Barahir, were in the first 100,000 articles on Misplaced Pages, was unjustified and is one of the causes of the dysfunction of Misplaced Pages from its creation to the present. We need to rid Misplaced Pages of Silmarillion cruft.John Pack Lambert (talk) 21:53, 8 January 2020 (UTC)
Johnpacklambert: Whatever the merits here, redirects are cheap and they are useful to readers searching for help, even if only brief. I suggest we point this at Fëanor. It may be worth saying that while many of us may feel the Silmarillion to be far less interesting than the Lord of the Rings, it gets some 600,000 hits a year, so our readers definitely consider it significant, and its characters worthy of attention. We should handle those requests gracefully. Chiswick Chap (talk) 22:20, 14 January 2020 (UTC)
Categories: