Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Mystery of the Blue Train

 This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record. The result of the debate was keep rewrite. Mindspillage (spill yours?) 04:13, 25 Apr 2005 (UTC)

The Mystery of the Blue Train
A personal book review, and not an article. I am too tired to try to turn this into an article, but if anyone wants to, I will reconsider~after a rewrite. Sjakkalle 13:06, 12 Apr 2005 (UTC)

I have, with some doubts, decided to withdraw my nomination and vote keep on the rewritten stub article. It is a bit short but it can be expanded. Sjakkalle 06:40, 18 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete Agreed. Mwanner 13:40, Apr 12, 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete POV book review. Mgm|(talk) 18:33, Apr 12, 2005 (UTC)
 * Redirect might work. 131.211.210.12 08:49, 13 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * That was me. I hate it when my PC logs out... Mgm|(talk) 08:49, Apr 13, 2005 (UTC)


 * Redirect to Agatha Christie. I don't see any useful material in this article, but if anyone does it can be merged. Dpbsmith (talk) 19:57, 12 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * Comment New stub contains useful material, nice work, but it should be merged into the Agatha Christie article. There's plenty of room. Dpbsmith (talk) 10:33, 18 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * Redirect to Agatha Christie. Nothing to merge. --Carnildo 22:58, 12 Apr 2005 (UTC)


 * Comment on the votes to redirect. I usually like redirects, but the Agatha Christie article has links to every single crime novel she made. Is it not better that the links to articles which we do not have remain red, so that we avoid having redirects to itself? I can imagine readers of the Agatha Christie article getting annoyed if they click The Mystery of the Blue Train only to find themselves at the top of the article they were just reading. Sjakkalle 08:21, 13 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * It's all sort of academic, since the Agatha Christie article says nothing specific about this novel. Still, it's just barely possible that someone might see the title, look it up, and be pleased to find the author, so there's some justification for a redirect. Particularly since a) the global search feature keeps appearing and disappearing, I think it's been available less than 1/3 of the time I've been on Wikipedia, and b) the Google and Yahoo search features aren't terribly reliable. I do not approve of automatically linking every novel in an article about an author, because it encourages creation of substubs. I think it's much better to leave them unlinked in the article, add brief notes to each title, and create whole articles only when it's clear that the quantity of material about the book is too large for the article. So personally I'd unlink all the book titles that do not have articles already. Dpbsmith (talk) 15:35, 13 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete . I think that it is better if it is redlinked than if it is redirected. Jeltz talk  13:41, 13 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * Changed my vote to keep after it was remade into a book stub. Jeltz talk  10:23, 17 Apr 2005 (UTC)


 * Keep. I just trimmed and rewrote it into what I believe to be a properly encyclopedic stub article. Bryan 05:47, 17 Apr 2005 (UTC)


 * Keep, now that it's not a book review but a stub. -- M P er el ( talk 07:01, Apr 17, 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep the stub. Xezbeth  10:25, Apr 17, 2005 (UTC)


 * This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.