Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cat among the Pigeons (Cat Royal)


 * 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 no consensus, default to keep. --Bongwarrior (talk) 01:47, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Cat among the Pigeons (Cat Royal)

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

This provides no references, there is no indication that the book, or the series of which it is part, is notable, and the article is no more than a plot summary plus basic details like author, publisher and ISBN. It was PRODded on the grounds of "no information" at a time when the article was only an infobox; the creator removed the PROD when adding the brief plot summary. So it needs to come here. JohnCD (talk) 19:50, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment I think the Cat Royal series, as a whole, is notable. The first book, The Diamond of Drury Lane, won several awards:, . This book may pass WP:BK individually; let me poke around a bit to see if I can find. Zagalejo^^^ 20:00, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Well, I didn't find much of substance. But it seems reasonable to either 1) include a short synposis of this book at the end of The Diamond of Drury Lane or 2) start a new article on the entire series and merge the info there. Zagalejo^^^ 20:16, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
 * (2) could be the way to go - another editor has been creating three-line plot-summaries of other books in the series and getting them speedied, but they might fit into a series article. JohnCD (talk) 22:38, 27 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Weak Keep. A merge to an article on the entire series would be better; but as the sequel to an award-winning book, I'm prepared to accept that this may be a notable subject for an article. Terraxos (talk) 04:10, 28 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Yamamoto Ichiro 会話 05:27, 5 February 2008 (UTC)


 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ··· 日本穣 ? · Talk to Nihonjoe 22:22, 14 February 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.