Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Théâtre Illuminata


 * 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   keep. Listed for 21 days with no arguments for deletion aside from the nominator. (non-admin closure) Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:05, 21 August 2010 (UTC)

Théâtre Illuminata

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

Non-notable book series; could find literally no independent sourcing about these books except a passing mention in the Seattle Times. MelanieN (talk) 19:11, 31 July 2010 (UTC)  Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:03, 7 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions.  —MelanieN (talk) 19:51, 31 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.

 Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, JForget  00:17, 14 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment The first part of the cycle, the book "Eyes Like Stars", was reviewed by the New York Times. Additionally, it was shortlisted for the Andrew Norton Award, see an interview concerning the book at the website of Nebula Awards. I can't find any independent sources for the second part, "Perchance to Dream". --Vejvančický (talk | contribs) 15:41, 9 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.


 * Keep. I have gutted the article of all the spam, leaving the rambling plot and characters section. To summarise: first book shortlisted for Andre Norton Award, was discussed by the New York Times in a discussion about fairies in books (along with several other books), author was interviewed, second book was mentioned briefly in a capsule review type. Also seems to have been moderately distributed and has a few amateur reviews. I think there is a case that collectively the three books merit treatment here but probably no further. Christopher Connor (talk) 01:40, 14 August 2010 (UTC)


 * Keep. If it was referenced in the Seattle Times it is real, Why should it be deleted? --DefyingGravityForGood (talk) 05:46, 14 August 2010 (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.