Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Anaklusmos


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. 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.

The result was   merge to Percy Jackson & The Olympians.  MBisanz  talk 01:48, 11 December 2008 (UTC)

Anaklusmos

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

This fictional weapon does not establish notability independent of Percy Jackson & The Olympians through the inclusion of real world information from reliable, third party sources. Most of the information is made up of original research and unnecessary plot details. There is no current assertion for future improvement of the article, so extended coverage is unnecessary. TTN (talk) 03:19, 6 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete- fancruft supported by only a single primary source. No notability established. This is simply not what an encyclopedia is for. Reyk  YO! 
 * Merge I agree this article is useless as is, but i do not understand the nomination: i see no excessive plot summary. What is called OR is likely to just be description--I don't eeally see synthesis. The article cannot stand on its own unless the weapons and the series were both of great significance, which seems unlikely.  (I fail to understand the last sentence, as usual; I ask once more TTN to word it differently, as nobody has yet proposed what it means) But this whole group of articles needs some careful attention,--its being done wrong, and we should rather be conserving and merging he fragments in the hope of getting the start for one decent article on the series  Ditto for all the related  articles. This is not the way to build the encyclopedia--help for those working on the topic is the way. Unconstructive nomination in terms of really improving the encycopedia. DGG (talk) 08:05, 6 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Merge per DGG.John Z (talk) 13:16, 6 December 2008 (UTC)
 * merge per DGG. -- Mvuijlst (talk) 21:55, 6 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete as more cruft (i.e. per nom). Eusebeus (talk) 23:45, 10 December 2008 (UTC)


 * 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.