Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of fanon by 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 delete. - Mailer Diablo 17:06, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

List of fanon by series
This article does not cite its references or sources, largely because in most cases no reliable sources exist. This appears to eb the gathering ground for trivia which are rejected in other articles as unverifiable, speculative or in other sundry ways fancruft. If anyone can suggest a better home for this fandom then please do. Guy 19:40, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete as unverifiable, unweidly, unmaintainable, etc. Anything that is both notable and verifiable should be in the article about the series/whatever the author(s) are fans of. We have category:Fan fiction to group what already exists on this. Thryduulf 21:46, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per Thryduulf. --Sparky Lurkdragon 22:11, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete WP:OR by definition. Danny Lilithborne 23:36, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete For all the reasons above. However some fanon should be added to their respective series' page (The very very few with citations). Stupidhumanzz 00:01, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Japan-related deletions.   -- Kbja 06:30, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete, indiscriminate collection of unverifiable trivia. &mdash; Haeleth Talk 10:08, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete, it is not sourced and most if not all of it violates OR. I would also recommed keeping an eye on Fanon (fiction) because the list orignated from there and was spilt about a month ago. I would not be surprised if someone tried to add it back on that page. --My old username 02:27, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
 * It's futile to try and fix this. Either keep it or delete it. Jack Cain 16:07, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
 * If you are talking to me I am not asking to fix it. I was suggesting watching the article the list was split from to make sure it was not recreated there. --My old username 23:00, 9 September 2006 (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.