Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Timeline of the Valiant Universe


 * 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. -- Cirt (talk) 21:08, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

Timeline of the Valiant Universe

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Contested prod which dubiously states that there's no consensus that articles need independent sources. If there's no consensus that articles need independent sources then that editor should change WP:V, WP:N, WP:RS and WP:OR... which all call for independent sources. Without independent sources that cover the subject in direct detail there is no reliable way to WP:verify notability of this article. Shooterwalker (talk) 04:08, 12 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete- The reality distortion field is strong in this one. All articles do in fact need reliable independent sources and this just doesn't have any. It is synthesis from start to finish. Reyk  YO!  06:35, 15 January 2011 (UTC)
 * This AfD nomination was incomplete (missing step 3). It is listed now. DumbBOT (talk) 11:38, 24 January 2011 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Comics and animation-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 00:54, 25 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 00:55, 25 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 00:55, 25 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete As said in the article lead, its aim is to be a fictional timeline. But that violates WP:NOT and hence is unencyclopedic. – sgeureka t•c 12:52, 25 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete The article doesn't meet the criteria of the general notability guideline, there are no third-party sources independent of the subject that cover the topic in detail and it's a plot-only description of a fictional work. The article easily meets the criteria of reasons for deletion. Jfgslo (talk) 15:17, 29 January 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.