Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Founding races from the Malazan Book of the Fallen series


 * 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 with leave to speedy renominate. Listed for 12 days with no arguments for deletion aside from the nominator but not enough participation to determine consensus. (non-admin closure) Ron Ritzman (talk) 23:49, 15 October 2009 (UTC)

Founding races from the Malazan Book of the Fallen series

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Challenged for being unsourced since June 2009. Does not indicate encyclopedic notability. -- Jeandré (talk), 2009-10-03t22:09z 22:09, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Hm...Pokémon test. Lots of content but not much sourcing; fiction topics are very difficult, deleting one implies a whole lot more need to be deleted as well, basically the entire contents of the MBF except for the book as well the contents of a vast number of others  templates - (swordoftruth, DarkTower, discworld).  I'm normally a stickler for policies and guidelines, but this one seems like it would wipe out a lot of content and be applied extremely unevenly.  It may be worth spending more time working on a policy or guideline (i.e. WP:FICTION) than engaging in an issue-by-issue deletion discussion.  WLU (t) (c) Wikipedia's rules: simple/complex 01:34, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

 Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, JForget  23:33, 9 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
 * Keep Category:Malazan Book of the Fallen has a set of well-written articles contributed by many editors based on a fictional "universe" like many others, apparently 10 novels. I wouldn't like to see coverage extended any further, but they are presumably useful as a reference for more than a few, such that Wikipedia has become the top Google hit (itself sometimes a cause for deletion, but not where it is a digest of, albeit useless, knowledge).  These are already lists and so merging does not seem an option, and deletion would be damaging. --Cedderstk 19:09, 10 October 2009 (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.