Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Final Destination books


 * 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 Final Destination (series). Without prejudice, if significant discussion in secondary sources independent of the article's subject is given of course the article(s) on the books could be created at some point. Final Destination (series) could perhaps use some info on this, but not if it is completely unsourced and a WP:OR violation. Cirt (talk) 11:32, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Final Destination books

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

Article seems to be a bit much for a series of novelizations stemming from a movie series; I don't see any notability. Completely unsourced, as well as crystal balling near the end. Also persistent overwikifying from a series of anon IP's; attempts to engage the user have met with zero success. Nommed for D per suggestion at WP:EAR by. Prince of Canadat 22:48, 21 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep or merge to Final Destination (series), as it seems like something about the books should be mentioned somewhere in the Final Destination set of articles. Each film book can be merged into the film articles, with the non-film novels merged to the series article. 05:20, 22 September 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.55.203.112 (talk)
 * With serious pruning, that would definitely make sense. Prince of Canadat 05:41, 22 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions.   --  Fabrictramp  |  talk to me  00:13, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:30, 26 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete. Not a reliable source in sight. Stifle (talk) 11:21, 26 September 2008 (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.