Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Victors (book)


 * 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   delete. NW ( Talk ) 01:09, 28 November 2009 (UTC)

The Victors (book)

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Source for the book title is WikiAnswers; no reliable source can be found to confirm this. Also, the book is unpublished and should not have an article yet per WP:BK. Only other sources provided are fansites/forums. Andrea ( talk ) 00:03, 21 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete: I can't find significant coverage for this book. Joe Chill (talk) 00:10, 21 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete: The only websites that mention this book are either forums or blogs. &mdash; Oli OR Pyfan! 00:21, 21 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 00:43, 22 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep The first book in the trilogy appears to be well-sourced and notable. I see no particular harm in leaving a stub article around on the assumption that it will develop as the book nears release. Jclemens (talk) 08:39, 22 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep. The series is extremely popular, and the first two books were bestsellers, and both are well-sourced.  GrandMattster 16:35, 24 November 2009 (UTC)
 * "Keep" when we don't even know what the title of this article should be? Maybe once we can actually confirm the book's title. Andrea  ( talk ) 16:57, 24 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete or perhaps mention in the article on the trilogy--at least until it is published. Suzanne Collins though notable is not an example of the sort of extremely famous author whose even unfinished work is notable. Cf .  Even the data that it will be released in 2010 comes from a Wikianswers page  posted before even the 2nd vol. was published. At this point, we have no RS indication that it has even been written. We can not  meet WP:V.      DGG ( talk ) 00:50, 25 November 2009 (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.