Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Deception Point


 * 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 redirect to Dan Brown. Equally split between merge or redirect, but there is no mention of content ready to be merged over, so going for redirect here. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 17:04, 15 November 2017 (UTC)

Deception Point

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

This article has long-standing unaddressed notability, style, and referencing issues. I don't believe the article as it stand fully qualifies for inclusion under notability guidelines for books, and the article as it stands is wholly a plot summary. Topperfalkon (talk) 17:33, 8 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 18:20, 8 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 18:20, 8 November 2017 (UTC)


 * Redirect to Dan Brown. Given the author, there may well be a notable work to be made here, but until then the redirect will serve well. - The Bushranger One ping only 23:17, 8 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Yes, that redirect sounds reasonable to me.--Topperfalkon (talk) 12:01, 9 November 2017 (UTC)


 * Keep or merge to Dan Brown. Deletion really is a non-starter, but coverage that would justify a separate article looks borderline. Having said that, there's certainly some scope for improvement on what we have right now. The best I found was a fair amount in the book The Dan Brown Enigma, a Publishers Weekly review, and the Hindustan Times article "Why does no one care about these other two Dan Brown books?" (Deception Point being one of them). --Michig (talk) 18:58, 9 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science fiction-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 00:35, 11 November 2017 (UTC)


 * Merge Per Michig. Jclemens (talk) 03:23, 13 November 2017 (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.