Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Killing Time (Justin Richards novel)


 * 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   merge to The Invisible Detective.   Wifione    .......  Leave a message  13:48, 30 October 2010 (UTC)

Killing Time (Justin Richards novel)

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

Non-notable book as per WP:BK Demiurge1000 (talk) 18:23, 16 October 2010 (UTC)  Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:02, 23 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Merge into The Invisible Detective. There's nothing notable about this book (or the others in the series that have their own articles) and the parent article could easily be expanded to accommodate the plot synopses. Jimmy Pitt   talk  22:08, 16 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 00:46, 18 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Redirect. That plot summary sure reads like it's off the back cover, and is likely a copyvio, so there's nothing to merge. Reviews might be found, so recreation/expansion should be left open. Hullaballoo Wolfowitz (talk) 03:55, 23 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Add a link to Invisible Detective on the disambiguation page Killing Time, then delete the original entry, since it's high dubious that anyone searching for the entry will type out the full "Killing Time (Justin Richards novel)" name.--hkr Laozi speak  05:54, 23 October 2010 (UTC)
 * merge into the article for the series. The book is not independently notable--in only about 200 libraries, a/c worldcat, which is trivial for a children's novel.Personally, I would like to revise our rules for fiction to indicate that the default way of handling series books like this is an article for the series, and anything more requires very strong proof of substantial notability. Our problem is that we talk as if we have only the two exclusive classes notable|nonnotable --actually, we can deal with somewhat finer distinctions by combination articles and inclusion on lists.    DGG ( talk ) 00:36, 24 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Merge and redirect as per above. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 11:14, 29 October 2010 (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.