Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dol Amroth


 * 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 Gondor. Tone 19:28, 13 January 2020 (UTC)

Dol Amroth

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Non-notable fictional location. Fails WP:GNG due to lack of meaningful coverage in reliable secondary sources, only such coverage is in passing. Hog Farm (talk) 00:24, 30 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. Hog Farm (talk) 00:24, 30 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Science fiction and fantasy-related deletion discussions. Hog Farm (talk) 00:24, 30 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. Hog Farm (talk) 00:24, 30 December 2019 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Keep The topic is notable as it passes the WP:GNG as it has entries in sources such as Tolkien: The Illustrated Encyclopaedia, Riders, Chivalry, and Knighthood in Tolkien and The Toponymy of Middle–Earth. Andrew🐉(talk) 00:45, 30 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete We are not an enycclopedia of Tolkien. We need to justify an article split on more than the fact that a comprehensive encyclopedia of Tolkien has an entry on the subject. The above listed sources do not demonstrate meaningful, indepth coverage. We have seen this before, the throwing out of obscure works and long articles with one point mentions.John Pack Lambert (talk) 13:30, 30 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Redirect to Gondor We should avoid having multiple articles on a subject that only deserves one. &#8213; Susmuffin Talk 16:51, 30 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom.--Jack Upland (talk) 03:43, 31 December 2019 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, – bradv  🍁  06:07, 6 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete or redirect to Gondor. In-universe importance does not correlate to real-world notability. – sgeureka t•c 09:58, 6 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Redirect to Gondor. The article is sourced mostly to primary sources, and what non-primary sources there are do not rise above the level of trivia and definitely do not help pass GNG. Devonian Wombat (talk) 11:38, 6 January 2020 (UTC)
 * 'Redirect With only 1 questionable keep vote, this should not have been relisted. Game encyclopedias and gazettes are not reliable sources. ValarianB (talk) 14:52, 6 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete or redirect - Fails to establish notability. TTN (talk) 12:00, 7 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete. I think the main problem with this article is the WP:INUNIVERSE style. Except for the brief Dol_Amroth section, the entire article is devoted to primary-sourced fictional history. This isn't an appropriate way to cover a fictional element; if the topic is truly notable, there should be plenty of real-world things to say. BenKuykendall (talk) 07:31, 10 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Redirect to Gondor per Susmuffin. Goustien (talk) 04:53, 12 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete or redirect. Not notable on its own. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 11:45, 12 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep as is discussed in independent sources, or alternately merge to Gondor. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 10:17, 13 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Where is it "discussed", name dropping is not discussion, discussion means the topic is engaged with in a meaningful way.John Pack Lambert (talk) 14:56, 13 January 2020 (UTC)
 * In source #8 for starters (the Foster reference), which discusses many places in some detail. There is extensive out-of-universe commentary all through Unfinished Tales, and it is cool that someone named some peaks. Might be a brief mention but is a meaningful point. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 19:17, 13 January 2020 (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.