Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Eriador


 * 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 Middle-earth. Tone 11:43, 29 November 2019 (UTC)

Eriador

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

No indication this fictional location passes WP:NFICTION/WP:GNG. Pure WP:PLOT. BEFORE fails to show anything that's not a mention in passing/fictional bio summary. Deprodded by User:Necrothesp with "significant location in Tolkien's work". Is this enough to keep this? I think not, per policies linked above. Let's discuss. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 10:34, 22 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here  10:34, 22 November 2019 (UTC)


 * Keep. I repeat, significant location in the works of one of the most significant authors in the English language. Clearly notable. We have many thousands of articles based purely on fictional elements. Where will this end, I wonder? -- Necrothesp (talk) 10:41, 22 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Fantasy-related deletion discussions. Necrothesp (talk) 10:41, 22 November 2019 (UTC)


 * Delete or merge to The Shire. I cannot find any significant coverage in reliable sources to show that this passes WP:GNG. -- Darth Mike (talk) 19:41, 22 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete - Fictional elements do not get a free pass because of the work. They need to prove their own notability. This currently fails to do that. TTN (talk) 01:03, 23 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep or merge to Middle-earth. Goustien (talk) 04:35, 23 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete — The references for the article show that this name is mentioned in the appendices of Lord of the Rings. It is not mentioned in the narrative. It is part of the backstory of novel; the earlier history of Middle-earth. I see no reason to keep it.--Jack Upland (talk) 04:50, 23 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete mention in appendices to a novel does not make a place, thing, or person notable. It is pretty much a sign that they are in fact not notable at all. I have read all the appendices, so people need to stop the bashing on those of us who are willing to put in the work to stop Wikipedia from being turned into a fan site. We had to do that fight against Star Wars, now we wage it on the LoTR front.John Pack Lambert (talk) 21:43, 25 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep. I just had reason to refer to this article and was surprised to see it up for deletion. It contains a lot of useful encyclopaedic information which should not be denigrated as fan-site. I am not a fan of Tolkien—the opposite—but I appreciate having the information available. I agree with the comment above that a very large number of articles is threatened if this one goes. We are not short of space or paper on Wikipedia: potentially useful articles should be given the benefit of the doubt. Spicemix (talk) 23:10, 25 November 2019 (UTC)
 * All Articles need to meet WP:N. Useful is completely relative to the user. Someone else could claim that a list of monsters from Final Fantasy VII would be encyclopedic. You'd have no objective argument to refute them with that logic. TTN (talk) 23:21, 25 November 2019 (UTC)
 * WP:ITSUSEFUL, and you can refer just as well or even better to https://lotr.fandom.com/wiki/Eriador --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 03:22, 26 November 2019 (UTC)


 * Delete. Fails NFICTION/GNG. Pure PLOT. Necrothesp does not advance a valid AfD argument. Kacper IV (talk) 09:37, 26 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Redirect to Middle-earth. There's a decent description about Eriador there. Hog Farm (talk) 17:57, 28 November 2019 (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.