Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Stone of Farewell


 * 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 redirect to Memory, Sorrow, and Thorn. (non-admin closure) f  e  minist  15:35, 16 May 2017 (UTC)

Stone of Farewell

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Fails GNG. Online results are advertisements. Mr. Guye (talk) 03:25, 1 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. Mr. Guye (talk) 02:04, 2 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. Mr. Guye (talk) 02:06, 2 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. Mr. Guye (talk) 02:17, 2 May 2017 (UTC)


 * Keep. He is a relatively known author, and so his books will get reviews. Giving that we keep video games with the same rationale, I think stuff like . or  is more than sufficient. Not noticing those seems also like a fail of WP:BEFORE on the part of the nominator - it's pretty easy to type in "williams review Stone of Farewell" into Google.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here  03:28, 2 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Are you sure about those sources? Do they pass Identifying reliable sources?--Mr. Guye (talk) 22:49, 4 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Probably as much as anything listed on the super-inclusive WikiProject Video games/Sources. If we can have an article about every minor game that got 1-2 reviews, I don't see why we should be more strict regarding books. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 07:03, 5 May 2017 (UTC)
 * It's surprising, to say the least, to see an WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS argument made for a completely different form of expression, as if video game articles have any relevance to young adult fantasy fiction. If there is a problem with the videogame sources, it should be dealt with at the relevant page, not battled out in unrelated AfD discussions. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 21:07, 8 May 2017 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Redirect to Memory, Sorrow, and Thorn, the parent series. This unsourced article is nothing but a fan's plot description and the only available review sources, including those linked above, are from fantasy/scify blogs and Amazon reviews.  no significant coverage in independent reliable sources and therefore no independent notabilty. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 21:07, 8 May 2017 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  MBisanz  talk 12:33, 9 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Redirect per eggishorn; isufficient reliavle sources in third-party, independent coverage to indicate standalone notability. &mdash;  O Fortuna   semper crescis, aut decrescis  12:59, 9 May 2017 (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.