Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Oathblood


 * 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. The article's subject is found to not be notable. &mdash; Coffee //  have a cup  //  beans  // 01:20, 15 March 2015 (UTC)

Oathblood

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

This book doesn't meet WP:NBOOK. Mikeblas (talk) 15:31, 7 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Also, completely redundant to Mercedes_Lackey_bibliography How do you ask for Speedy Deletion? --Enyavar (talk) 17:24, 7 March 2015 (UTC)


 * Delete per Enyavar. Looks completely redundant. – Margin1522 (talk) 17:45, 7 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:14, 7 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:14, 7 March 2015 (UTC)


 * Delete -- I agree. This article is redundant from the Lackey Bib page. HullIntegrity  \ talk / 21:44, 7 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete doesn't meet WP:NBOOK, any usable info could be moved to author article Mercedes Lackey. Coolabahapple (talk) 05:44, 9 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Redirect to Mercedes Lackey bibliography or delete. I don't see any coverage in reliable sources.  Maybe someone can locate print reviews; in that case, the article can be recreated, but I think a redirect would be best right now.  I'd settle for deletion in order to get consensus established. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 05:04, 13 March 2015 (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.