Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Forester Universe


 * 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 delete. Vanamonde (Talk) 00:01, 9 August 2020 (UTC)

Forester Universe

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

A fictional setting. The sources cited do not indicate notability of the topic per WP:GNG. The article also mostly reads like a bibliography, and in that sense is redundant (WP:CFORK) to the article about the author, Kyell Gold, which already contains the bibliographical information.  Sandstein  13:54, 22 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions.   Sandstein   13:54, 22 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. Toughpigs (talk) 14:12, 22 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Science fiction and fantasy-related deletion discussions. Toughpigs (talk) 14:12, 22 July 2020 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Delete - None of the sources that discuss the fictional universe/books are from actual reliable sources, and the Ursa Major awards, which is really the only claim to notability being made here, are not a notable award itself. It could possibly be redirected to Kyell Gold, who may have some notability.  Though even that is kind of questionable as his only real claim to legit notability is just being nominated for, but not winning, a notable award.  Rorshacma (talk) 15:54, 22 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete as a location that doesn't have enough sources to indicate notability. A redirect is a good idea as WP:ATD, to the author or a series article. Archrogue (talk) 18:31, 26 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Merge to Kyell Gold. Seems like this can be included there, through I am a bit concerned about possible WP:OR in the article. As for redirect, I'd like to see a reliable source first that uses this term. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 02:13, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,    Kadzi    (talk) 20:42, 30 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete as lacking reliable sources to meet the WP:GNG. Article is mostly a publication history which is duplicated at the author's page, and would be an acceptable redirect target. Jontesta (talk) 18:41, 4 August 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.