Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Taken (Left Behind: The Kids)


 * 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 Left Behind: The Kids. Ron Ritzman (talk) 23:41, 12 June 2011 (UTC)

Taken (Left Behind: The Kids)

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Contested PROD. Article does not have sources cited per WP:RS, and the prod was declined on the basis that similar articles exist. But WP:OSE usually covers this argument as baseless for keep. Phearson (talk) 12:56, 22 May 2011 (UTC)
 * This completely mischaracterises the reason why I pulled the Prod. When you have around a dozen essentially identical articles on the same series of books, ie Left Behind: The Kids, it makes sense to approach them in the same way; that is if we are trying to build a coherent encyclopaedia rather than score policy points. What I said in my edit summary was "a number of books in this series have similar articles. It is not good practice to delete an odd one. Better to take them all together to decide what to do - ie delete or source or merge". I would add that there is no indication that the nominator has followed the steps in WP:BEFORE. TerriersFan (talk) 14:46, 22 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Merge - a short plot summary into Left Behind: The Kids and do the same with the other books in the series. Though the series is notable I haven't been able to track down the necessary reviews to make the individual books notable. However, the main page needs plot summaries and these can be easily sourced. TerriersFan (talk) 15:09, 22 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions.  — • Gene93k (talk) 18:46, 22 May 2011 (UTC)


 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:02, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

 
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, MacMedtalk stalk 21:37, 5 June 2011 (UTC)


 * Merge per User:TerriersFan. The series is notable. The book doesn't appear to be, but it's hard to sift through all the hits for such a generic name and determine what might confer it. — chro • man • cer 22:59, 7 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Merge to series article. Current article is not written nearly well enough to be merged directly, so whomever merges will need to clean it up. Crisco 1492 (talk) 14:42, 9 June 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.