Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ruin, city state South Eastern Turkey


 * 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. Wizardman Operation Big Bear 02:37, 22 April 2011 (UTC)

Ruin, city state South Eastern Turkey

 * – ( View AfD View log )
 * Adding:
 * Adding:

This article gives in loving detail the fictional background to a non-notable novel by a non-notable author. Fails WP:NBOOK and WP:GNG andy (talk) 14:29, 14 April 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete. No independent sources cited, and nothing I can find suggests notability of the author or of the book, let alone of this particular element of the book. JamesBWatson (talk) 14:41, 14 April 2011 (UTC)


 * Comment. It's difficult to check google for this author because there are surprisingly many people with the same name. However this search, which cuts out some of the "rivals" and a press release yields only 291 hits, most of them irrelevant, or bookstores, or based around press releases. andy (talk) 14:44, 14 April 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete — two hits in Google: a book review in the Irish Independent and a promotion in Ok! Magazine. The book review is trivial at 109 words, while the magazine article is geared towards a Kindle competition in which Toyne's text is a secondary prize. This doesn't constitute significant coverage. Mephistophelian (talk) 16:05, 14 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 16:08, 14 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 16:09, 14 April 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete -- Although publishers seem to be fairly excited about this book, and its planned sequels (see this article at Bookseller.com), it seems to be too soon to see if their expectations will be met. Few reviews have yet been published, and the book has not been available long enough to see if it is going to make any bestseller lists.  I have added the article about Simon Toyne (writer) created by the same author as this article.  WikiDan61 ChatMe!ReadMe!! 18:04, 14 April 2011 (UTC)
 * That's fine by me. It seems to be part of the same attempt at promotion. Delete it. andy (talk) 19:59, 14 April 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete certainly the article on the fictional city. Delete the author as well, but I can imagine him becoming notable in the (near?) future. But the logical order of article creation is author -> books -> locations and characters in those books (for very notable books), not the other way around. Fram (talk) 07:09, 15 April 2011 (UTC)


 * Keep the article on the writer. Two of the films he has worked as a writer and director on have blue links to their own Wikipedia articles.  Having a notable part in a notable film, makes you notable.  These two AFDs should be split.   D r e a m Focus  12:45, 16 April 2011 (UTC)
 * You're being rather generous here. These weren't films but minor TV shows and are of arguable notability. Moreover despite what the article says, the reference in IMDB makes it clear that he was only a director in 8 episodes of one of these shows and simply a writer in all the others. In any case notability is not inherited so we have to look for sources that indicate that his work on these shows attracted the kind of attention that qualifies him as notable. Guess what...? andy (talk) 16:17, 16 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Only eight episodes? Sounds fine to me.  See WP:ENTERTAINER.   D r e a m Focus  17:21, 16 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Having a part in a notable film does not make you notable: as andy pointed out, notability is not inherited. And as for the films having Wikipedia articles, that is most certainly not a proof of notability. Wikipedia is not a reliable source, and there are thousands of articles which have no right to exist, (which is why we have deletions). Thinking that existence of a Wikipedia article establishes notability is the sort of mistake which is very common among newcomers to Wikipedia, but I am astonished to see it from such a well-established editor as Dream Focus. However, it is really irrelevant, since even if the films are notable it doesn't prove that Toyne is. JamesBWatson (talk) 20:59, 16 April 2011 (UTC)
 * The "notability is not inherited" thing is for people who haven't done anything but are related to someone who has. Totally different situation here.  Writers and directors are notable for their work.  If their work is notable by Wikipedia standards, than the accomplishment of creating it through your writing and/or directing skills, counts towards your notability.   D r e a m Focus  22:59, 16 April 2011 (UTC)

 Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Logan Talk Contributions 00:21, 22 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Delete. The book isn't notable; why should a fictional location in the book be notable? Roscelese (talk &sdot; contribs) 01:54, 22 April 2011 (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.