Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Divide trilogy


 * 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.   A rbitrarily 0   ( talk ) 17:25, 1 May 2010 (UTC)

The Divide trilogy

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

Non-notable fantasy trilogy that is unsourced and entirely made up of in-universe descriptions.  MBisanz  talk 01:25, 24 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep but trim back to stub it was hard to find, but got the publisher names and isbns and linked the artists article to these books. artist for the books is highly notable. the books appear to have been initially published by a small press, then picked up by Scholastic, one of the major trade publishers, so there was likely a fever of word of mouth bookselling which drove the publisher to pick them up. there are some mentions in trade journals that recommend titles for booksellers. there was an extensive book review from a trade journal on amazon, but i cant find it now. the contents are not notable, no one has written about them, so i say just trim back all but the publication information and a brief plot summary. post harry potter, most fantasy novels like this that are picked up by trade pubs should be considered notable. the authors of this article simply hadnt done their job at all.Mercurywoodrose (talk) 04:20, 24 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep   I am unwilling to say that all fantesy novels by trade publishers are notable, but these particular are, being each held in almot a thousand WorldCat libraries . Reviews are of course needed. I am not convinced the character list is irrelevant or inappropriate, but that's an editing question. DGG ( talk ) 08:45, 24 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Good points. i will take up the trimming of the article on its talk page, if it passes afd, and just say that the character section doesnt add or subtract to the subjects notability, unlike reviews, etc. you are of course correct about all trade fantasy not necessarily being notable. case by case would apply.Mercurywoodrose (talk) 21:29, 24 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 16:30, 24 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science fiction-related deletion discussions.  -- --Darkwind (talk) 23:15, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep Click the Google news link at the top of the AFD. Times Online and Wizard News mention the writer is notable for the trilogy, her opinion sought out in the Times article.    D r e a m Focus  14:59, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. No evidence of notability. Doctorfluffy (robe and wizard hat) 04:42, 29 April 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.