Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Concepts in the Ender's Game series


 * 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   delete.  Ryan Postlethwaite See the mess I've created or let's have banter 20:45, 22 June 2013 (UTC)

Concepts in the Ender's Game series

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

I'm an Ender's Game fan myself, but this article is entirely sourced to OSC and the Ender's Game series. It falls severely afoul of 'in-universe' style writing and doesn't contain any evidence of real world notability or significance. v/r - TP 20:16, 14 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Funny, I just finished re-reading these...anyhow, WP:CRUFT to the extreme. Something might be found for Anton's Key about why it couldn't really exist, but the others not so much - delete. Ansh666 23:07, 14 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:47, 15 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:47, 15 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science fiction-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:47, 15 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:47, 15 June 2013 (UTC)


 * Keep Helps understand the notable series. A big budget movie has been made even.   D r e a m Focus  02:00, 15 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Policy? Ansh666 03:50, 15 June 2013 (UTC)
 * If it can be sourced, that'd be great. Otherwise, we should export it to Wikia.--v/r - TP 13:38, 15 June 2013 (UTC)
 * I'm pretty sure these exist at http://ansible.wikia.com already, in greater detail. Ansh666 17:38, 19 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete - There is no significant coverage about the various concepts where are sourced directly to source material, and includes original research such as "The novels' treatment of time dilation is also inconsistent with standard theory." -- Whpq (talk) 14:05, 19 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete as WP:OR and WP:FANCRUFT. I don't care that WP:ITSUSEFUL. --BDD (talk) 18:58, 21 June 2013 (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.