Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Vedontakal Vrop (2nd nomination)


 * 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. &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 22:45, 6 September 2019 (UTC)

Vedontakal Vrop
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Non-notable fictional opera. No independent reliable sources attest to the notability of this construct. Fails WP:GNG, which requires that a topic should have "received significant coverage in reliable sources [NB: sources plural] that are independent of the subject" in order to qualify for an article on Wikipedia. The only source listed which is not itself the novel in which the fictional opera appears is this dead link to a PhD thesis. Even leaving aside the fact that unpublished theses are not typically regarded as reliable sources, this is not significant coverage as the fictional opera is not discussed "directly and in detail". The thesis covers the fictional opera on pages 96-98, but almost all of this space is taken up with lengthy verbatim quotation from the fictional opera itself, with the barest of commentary thereupon. If this is the sole basis on which it is asserted that the article meets our notability policy, it is staggeringly thin. Amisom (talk) 14:09, 30 August 2019 (UTC)


 * Delete - According to WP:SCHOLARSHIP thesis can be used "but care should be exercised": if possible it should be "cited" somewhere (this paper has not cited anywhere). It should be "published" (this paper has not been published). It should be publicly available from a library like Proquest (it is not). And "they are often, in part, primary sources" of which this paper is primarily "verbatim quotation from the fictional opera itself". Eliminate this problematic source and there is nothing left to demonstrate notability. A single minor mention in a problematic unpublished student thesis is not significant coverage. -- Green  C  15:25, 30 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 07:29, 1 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 07:29, 1 September 2019 (UTC)


 * Delete - neither of the novels this fictional opera appears in are particularly notable - does not meet WP:FICTION or WP:GNG - Epinoia (talk) 22:03, 6 September 2019 (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.