Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dragons (Pern)


 * 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. There doesn't appear to be a consensus here, just two sides in disagreement. Not sure additional relisting would help in this instance. KaisaL (talk) 08:09, 5 March 2020 (UTC)

Dragons (Pern)

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Fictional topic that fails to establish notability. TTN (talk) 16:45, 17 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. TTN (talk) 16:45, 17 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Science fiction and fantasy-related deletion discussions. TTN (talk) 16:45, 17 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. TTN (talk) 16:45, 17 February 2020 (UTC)

""The telepathic communication between dragon and rider can be seen as feminine language. Some feminist critics see language itself as masculinized. They argue that our very ideas and thoughts are structured by the male-dominated words we use. McCaffrey offers telepathy as an alternative to traditional language... In Dragonflight, telepathic communication provides an instantaneous level of trust and love between dragon and rider... That it is female characters who have this power in the greatest degree stresses its femininity. Dragonflight offers a subtle analysis of the gendering of language.""
 * Keep per WP:NEXIST and WP:ARTN. Dragons are central to Anne McCaffrey's work, and any discussion of her writing will naturally examine dragons as symbols within the narrative. For example:


 * That quote is from Anne McCaffrey: A Critical Companion by Robin Roberts, Greenwood Press (1996). Here are some more sources that talk about McCaffrey's dragons:


 * Of Modern Dragons and Other Essays on Genre Fiction by John Lennard, Humanities-Ebooks (2008)
 * Dragonholder: The Life and Dreams (So Far) of Anne McCaffrey by Todd McCaffrey, Open Road Media (2014)
 * The Dragonlover's Guide to Pern by Jody Lynn Nye, Random House (1997)
 * Magill's Guide to Science Fiction and Fantasy Literature: The absolute at large ed by T.A. Schippey, Salem Press (1996)
 * Dragons of Fantasy: The Scaly Villians & Heroes of Tolkien, Rowling, Mccaffrey, Pratchett & Other Fantasy Greats! by Anne C. Petty, Cold Spring Press (2004)
 * WP:NEXIST says that the topic is notable if reliable sources exist, even if they're not currently in the article. WP:ARTN says that the current state of the article's content doesn't affect the topic's notability -- there isn't a lot of real-world content on the page right now, but that makes it an incomplete page, not a non-notable topic. I'll post these sources on the page as a "Further reading" section, so that people who want to improve the article can use these sources. -- Toughpigs (talk) 18:47, 17 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Half the sources seem irrelevant, and the other half belong in the main article. TTN (talk) 19:09, 17 February 2020 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: Relisting to see if a consensus will arise. BD2412 T 05:27, 26 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep absolutely crucial per the conversation raised by Toughpigs. This are fundamental concepts within the series, and are the center of the books as works -- there is probably a ton of work to do around cleaning up the article and making it manageable, but you don't just kill obviously notable stuff. Sadads (talk) 03:21, 18 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep I added in two references to the article, once I believe may count as significant coverage in a reliable source. Just search for "dragon" "pern" and telepathy, fire, mating, or any other such things to find more reliable sources to add and check for coverage.  I agree they are a notable part of the bestselling book series, and best to just have that information in one place, instead of duplicated in so many book articles.  Too much information to be in Dragonriders of Pern so a valid spinout article.   D r e a m Focus  00:43, 19 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete. Sources listed in article or in the discussion above are unfortunately mentions in passing/WP:PLOT. All the arguments focus on in-universe notability. It does not matter for us how important dragons are to the Pern-verse (and yes, they are a key element of it, so what). What matters for us if real world notability, and nobody has shown that the dragons of Pern have been analyzed in a scholarly fashion or such. Please don't just WP:GOOGLEHIT us with random works that appear for "dragon+Pern" search and provide information, with quotes or such, on which sources actually discuss the subject in-depth and not just as a plot summary for the novel(s).--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 11:01, 19 February 2020 (UTC)
 * The paragraph I quoted above looks at McCaffrey's dragons through the lens of feminist literary theory. That is exactly the kind of in-depth source that you're asking for. -- Toughpigs (talk) 14:27, 19 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete This is a hard-to-read INUNIVERSE mess (geneticist Kitti Ping Yung is fictional, right?), consisting of mostly PLOT, with OR sprinkled in. Bits of the present material indicate that Sexuality in Dragonriders of Pern might be a relevant topic, but we'd still be left with sourcing problems, so I'd argue for WP:TNT here. On the other hand, if someone can wanted to have a dig at incorporating material into Dragonriders of Pern or Characters in Dragonriders of Pern and source it, I wouldn't be opposed. – sgeureka t•c 13:35, 20 February 2020 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, BD2412  T 05:27, 26 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete Per WP:TNT as an WP:ALLPLOT, crufty article that belongs in FANDOM. No prejudice towards the creation of a new article that is fully backed up by sources cited in this AfD.ZXCVBNM (TALK) 13:34, 26 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep. Being poorly written is not a criteria for deletion. Sources exist. That they are not currently used in tbe article is not a criteria for deletion. Perhaps the problem is that the author is a woman, creates science fiction with strong female characters, and the largely male editorship of Wikipedia is not aware of the impact of her work? As her biographer says, "In making dragons, which had heretofore been featured primarily as evil beasts, into attractive companions, Anne reshaped our cultural image of them. Significantly she did so in a structure in which queen dragons were the species' leaders." StarryGrandma (talk) 15:17, 26 February 2020 (UTC)
 * I'm all for this being explored in a future article, but this current one is unsalvageable. It would be better per WP:REDLINK to delete it so that there is space for someone to write an article on the topic that is not entirely WP:OR.ZXCVBNM (TALK) 08:43, 27 February 2020 (UTC)
 * The biographer is just using the dragons as an example to prove how McCaffrey is a good writer. It doesn't suggest WP:SIGCOV of the dragons.  Bait30   Talk? 23:38, 4 March 2020 (UTC)


 * Keep per available sources, WP:ARTN, and WP:NEXIST. gidonb (talk) 13:17, 3 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete as WP:CRUFT: as Piotrus mentioned, the sources do not appear to be WP:SIGCOV. Even if they were significant coverage, I would still recommend deletion per WP:TNT.  Bait30   Talk? 23:38, 4 March 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.