Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Literature: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 22:07, 4 February 2024

This is a collection of discussions on the deletion of articles related to Literature. It is one of many deletion lists coordinated by WikiProject Deletion sorting. Anyone can help maintain the list on this page.

Adding a new AfD discussion

Adding an AfD to this page does not add it to the main page at WP:AFD. Similarly, removing an AfD from this page does not remove it from the main page at WP:AFD. If you want to nominate an article for deletion, go through the process on that page before adding it to this page. To add a discussion to this page, follow these steps:

Edit this page and add {{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PageName}} to the top of the list. Replace "PageName" with the relevant article name, i.e. the one on the existing AFD discussion. Also, indicate the title of the article in the edit summary as it is particularly helpful to add a link to the article in the edit summary. When you save the page, the discussion will automatically appear.
You should also tag the AfD by adding {{subst:delsort|Literature|~~~~}} to it, which will inform editors that it has been listed here. You may place this tag above or below the nomination statement or at the end of the discussion thread.

There are a few scripts and tools that can make this easier.

Removing a closed AfD discussion

Closed AfD discussions are automatically removed by a bot.

Other types of discussions

You can also add and remove other discussions (prod, CfD, TfD etc.) related to Literature. For the other XfD's, the process is the same as AfD (except {{Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/PageName}} is used for MFD and {{transclude xfd}} for the rest). For PRODs, adding a link with {{prodded}} will suffice.

Further information

For further information see Wikipedia's deletion policy and WP:AfD for general information about Articles for Deletion, including a list of article deletions sorted by day of nomination.

This list also includes a sublist or sublists of deletions related to poetry.

Archived discussions (starting from September 2007) may be found at:

Purge page cache

watch

Literature

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 no consensus‎. Star Mississippi 22:14, 19 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Serfdom in Tibet controversy

AfDs for this article:

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This is a fairly unusual XfD but I submit that this article is based in large part on original research, despite citing a decent number of sources. The entire article plays out as a tit-for-tat "China says this" vs "Tibet exile/apologist says that" and there isn't really an attempt to actually frame anything within the context of "what actually happened".

It's understandable to say "the issue is contentious" but when the entire article becomes a matter of paraphrasing different POVs, there's very little that a reader can actually take out of the article. The only "real" encyclopedic piece of work I can see is "Tibetan welfare after the Chinese takeover", which itself does not seem particularly germane to the question of whether serfdom existed in Tibet prior to 1951, other than, perhaps, insinuating that the Chinese government does not care about Tibet or rather that the Tibetan social structure is so rigid that reforms have only been partially successful. Regardless, it does not feel as if this segment is appropriate for inclusion as a matter of historicity.

The same topic is covered to some length in the article Social class in Tibet, which approaches a similar topic from a perspective much more aligned with the standards on Wikipedia. I understand that approaching an article entitled "Controversy" is understandably difficult, but articles like Investiture Controversy and Controversy in Russia regarding the legitimacy of eastward NATO expansion handle their respective topics with substantially more grace and include the proper historical context instead of devolving eventually to namedropping entities and/or historians and assigning respective quotations without any contextualization as to what they mean. Augend (drop a line) 22:07, 4 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Literature, Philosophy, History, Buddhism, Geography, Social science, Asia, and Central Asia. Augend (drop a line) 22:07, 4 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep & rewrite. Regardless of whether serfdom has or has not existed in Tibet, the topic has gained enough traction and is notable. A quick search of "serfdom in Tibet" on Google Scholar brings up loads of articles: [1]. Social class in Tibet is a suitable article, but I think this topic deserves its own page.

That being said, if this article survives AfD, it will need to be significantly rewritten. Definitely don't make WP:POV forks out of it, but then I agree that there must be significant effort to compare POVs into a coherent article. We can also jettison the "Human rights in Tibet" section. Cheers, --The Lonely Pather (talk) 23:30, 4 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep & rewrite. I'd mostly agree with The Lonely Panther's position here, that the debate itself deserves its own article, mostly even just to keep track of all the perspectives on the issues. The 'serfdom controversy' is significant enough on its own, as seen by the size of the literature, to deserve a separate article from Chinese administration in Tibet and the controversy over that.

Potential rewrite could for sure use a lot more definitions and information on the structure, prevalence, and development of class structures throughout Tibetan history. Additionally more detail on exactly which historical events contain 'competing versions of Tibetan History', such as the disagreements over the nature of the 1959 Tibetan Uprising, is vital. Literal sun (talk) 18:00, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of China-related deletion discussions. Cunard (talk) 12:53, 9 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Herald (Benison) (talk) 04:10, 12 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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.

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 redirect‎ to Anarchism in Sweden. Owen× ☎ 19:19, 11 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Roland Vila

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This article has existed as an unreferenced stub since its creation in 2012. As part of the unreferenced article backlog drive, I attempted to find some sources to add to this article. But unfortunately, I came up very short. I managed to find a database entry of Vila's grave plot,[2] an obituary to Vila that I can't access, as it's locked behind a paywall,[3] and a brief mention in a journal article.[4] But that's it. I'm not confident that the subject of this article has received significant coverage in reliable sources. Given this, and that I can't find any targets for merging/redirecting, I'm nominating this article for deletion. Grnrchst (talk) 13:26, 4 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Literature, Spain, and Sweden. Grnrchst (talk) 13:26, 4 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 13:55, 4 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. He's been published by Bakhåll, a respected Swedish publishing house. There seems to be another potentially relevant text in Göteborgs-Tidningen 25 May 1987, but I can't access it. It seems plausible he might live up to our notability standards, but I can't access the text to determine for certain. Someone at a Swedish university with access to the newspaper collection of the Royal Library might. /Julle (talk) 18:17, 4 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Anarchism in Sweden and add Anarki till vardags in Further reading. I haven't found much secondary source coverage on the subject, but he is often cited for this book which should be listed in that article. I searched WorldCat, LoC, https://libris.kb.se, Internet Archive, and came up dry. Didn't find anything significant beyond citations for "Anarki till vardags" or the co-author "Thomas Hallon Hallbert." No hits in SvD or other major Swedish newspapers. I'm sure there can be more in Swedish-language periodical archives, so open to those findings. czar 01:36, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect per czar. I've always held off on AfDing this article myself since I went through basically Julle's thought process - a WP:NAUTHOR pass in Swedish-language sources seemed plausible enough. But like czar I've only come up with hints of stuff on Anarki till vardags any time I've tried. I like the solution of redirecting to Anarchism in Sweden. -- asilvering (talk) 17:04, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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.

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 speedy keep. Nomination withdrawn. (non-admin closure)‎ Geschichte (talk) 18:26, 4 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Admiral's Caravan

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I don't believe this book is notable. I found one very small review of the book, from 1892 (https://www.jstor.org/stable/44037323) and one minor mention of the book as one Carryl wrote in Guide to Literary Masters and their works from 2007. I was not able to find any really notable coverage. Jaguarnik (talk) 07:26, 4 February 2024 (UTC) Withdrawn by nominator: reviews were identified by Cunard. Jaguarnik (talk) 17:34, 4 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Literature and New York. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 07:38, 4 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per the significant coverage in multiple independent reliable sources. Wikipedia:Notability (books)#Criteria says:
A book is presumed notable if it verifiably meets, through reliable sources, at least one of the following criteria:
1. The book has been the subject of two or more non-trivial published works appearing in sources that are independent of the book itself. This can include published works in all forms, such as newspaper articles, other books, television documentaries, bestseller lists, and reviews. This excludes media re-prints of press releases, flap copy, or other publications where the author, its publisher, agent, or other self-interested parties advertise or speak about the book.
Sources
1. "The Admiral's Caravan". Boston Commonwealth. Vol. 32, no. 14. 1882-11-12. p. 7. Retrieved 2024-02-04 – via Internet Archive.
  The review notes: ""The Admiral's Caravan," by Charles E. Carryl, with illustrations by Reginald B. Birch (New York: The Century Co.), is a delightful book for children or for anyone, for that matter, who has not lost the love for genuine fancifulness; for the vivid, child-like imaginativeness that seems sensible enough to the wise, while the unwise see in it nothing but foolishness. Mr. Carryl's 'Dorothy' learns no scientific knowledge, points no moral, sugar-coated or otherwise, does nothing, in fact, but to go to sleep on Christmas Eve and forthwith make au excursion in dream-land that is charming in its incidents and gay in its fun, while at the same time its strangest transformation-scenes are true to the peculiar logic of dreams. Readers of 'St. Nicholas' are already familiar with Dorothy's adventures, made yet more vivid by Mr. Birch's capital illustrations. A child like child is sufficiently rare in literature to be precious: Dorothy is such a child; and Alice, with all her 'looking-glass' experience, would surely claim her as her dearest friend. The gray cover with its bright figures is in excellent keeping with the story."
2. Street, Douglas (1985). "Charles E. Carryl". In Estes, Glenn E. (ed.). Dictionary of Literary Biography. Vol. 42: American Writers for Children Before 1900. Detroit: Gale. p. 124. ISBN 0-8103-1720-6. Retrieved 2024-02-04 – via Internet Archive.
  The book notes: "In The Admiral's Caravan nonsense takes precedence over action. There are instances in this story in which nonsense and wordplay seem to serve the author's whim, having little impact on the plot itself. Taken singly these passages afford the reader moments of amusement within the novel. Dorothy, for instance, comes across "a charming little cottage with vines trained about the latticed windows, and with a sign over the door, reading, The Outside Inn." As she pushes open the cottage door to investigate, she finds "there was no inside to the house, and she came out into the field again on the other side of the door." This wall was papered and curtained nicely "but there was a notice pasted up beside the door, reading—The Inn-side out as if the rest of the house had gone out for a walk, and might be expected back at any time." It is precisely because of incongruities such as these that Carryl's stories were enjoyed. The absurdity of The Admiral's Caravan gave readers a distinctive entertainment, one eclipsed only by Carryl's earlier work. Judging from responses of readers printed in St. Nicholas magazine after the novel's serialization, nineteenth-century America had rarely experienced such inventiveness from a native-born novelist.""
3. "Books Reviews: The Admiral's Caravan". The Golden Rule. Vol. 7, no. 4. 1892-10-27. p. 75. ProQuest 88722883.
  The review notes: "The Admiral's Caravan. Charles E. Carryl is our American peer of the author of "Alice in Wonderland." His "Davy and the Goblin" proved it, and this new and most charming book confirms it. There are the same delightful puns and sharp sayings, the same fantastic personages and odd antics, even the same occasional whiffs of droll poetry. The admiral's caravan, together with Dorothy, go down the Ferry to Nowhere, "where the nobodies live on their nothing a day," enter the tree-top country, see the marvels of Bob Scarlet's garden and the toy-shop, and after a few adventures with the sizing tower, Humphrey, the camel, and other queer creatures and things, Dorothy and the caravan get safely home again. The child or the grown-up person that cannot enjoy this book has something wofully wrong with him. [New York: The Century Company. Pp. 140. $1.50.]"
4. "The Admiral's Caravan". Publishers Weekly. No. 1081. 1892-10-15. p. 623. Retrieved 2024-02-04 – via Internet Archive.
  The review notes: "The scene of the story is laid in Dreamland, the principal characters being a little girl and a wooden admiral and his companions. Dorothy witnesses a great many queer scenes and meets many odd characters in Dreamland, her adventures being something like those of Davy in "Davy and the goblin," by the same author."
5. Benét, William Rose (1934-02-03). "The Phoenix Nest". The Saturday Review of Literature. p. 457. Retrieved 2024-02-04 – via Internet Archive.
  The article notes: "I have often pondered the fact that England had only one Lewis Carroll, while we had two grand nonsense men who spelt their name with a "y," (Samivel.) First, Charles E.—author of that immortal story, 'The Admiral's Caravan," and that immortal ballad in it, "The Plaint of the Camel"; ... No grander tale for intelligent children was ever written than "The Admiral's Caravan." When it began to appear in St. Nicholas, with the marvelous Birch illustrations, I know two children at least, in the old days, who were ecstatically happy."
6. "A Quaint Child's Book". Book News. No. 123. November 1882. p. 81. Retrieved 2024-02-04 – via Internet Archive.
  The review notes: "The Century Company have made up a tempting book of material which first appeared in the pages of St. Nicholas. "The Admiral's Caravan" is a book for boys and girls. The scene of the story is laid in Dreamland, the principle characters being a little girl Dorothy, and a wooden admiral from the Blue Admiral Inn, and his companions, the Highlander, and Sir Walter Rosettes. There are animals and birds that talk, and animated dolls, and a camel that is fed on glue, and laments its hard fate in verse. Philadelphia Press."
7. "More Books for the Young". The Dial. Vol. 13, no. 156. 1892-12-18. p. 397. Retrieved 2024-02-04 – via Internet Archive.
  The review notes: "The Admiral's Caravan" (Century Co.) is a charming story for younger children by Mr. Charles E. Carryl. It is modelled upon "Alice in Wonderland," but it is clever and contains some amusing verses. The illustrations by Birch are capital."
8. "Books of the Season". Current Literature. Vol. 11, no. 4. December 1892. p. 388. Retrieved 2024-02-04 – via Internet Archive.
  The review notes: "For youngsters who care to be bewildered by innocent foolery, the spectacle of incredible beings occupying impossible situations, jocular attitudes and far-fetched explanations somewhat after the manner introduced to the world by a certain adventuress Alice is provided The Admiral's Caravan by Charles E. Carryl, with illustrations by Reginald B. Birch (Century Co.). The book is full of clever illustrations and its verses are as bright as its prose."
9. "Children's Books". The Christian Union. Vol. 46, no. 23. 1892-12-03. p. 1068. Retrieved 2024-02-04 – via Internet Archive.
  The review notes: "The Admiral's Caravan, by Charles E. Carryl, published by the same company, suggests" Alice in Wonderland," and yet has a charm of its own. The children of to-day need these purely imaginative books to counteract the effect of school pressure, and the dilutions of history, science, and literature that are the mental" infants' foods" of the present day. ($1.50.)"
10. "The Admiral's Caravan". The Critic. Vol. 18, no. 562. 1892-11-26. p. 296. Retrieved 2024-02-04 – via Internet Archive.
  The review notes: "The Admiral who personally conducts The Admiral's Caravan in Mr. Lewis Carroll's new goblin story was an admiral of wood on a pedestal in front of the Blue Admiral Inn. He had for neighbors a red-whiskered Highlander, who mounted guard before an instrument shop, and a Sir Walter Rosettes, who stood holding a bunch of tobacco leaves outside Mrs. Peevy's tobacco-shop, or rather Smoker's Emporium. But the Admiral was alive, as he proved to Miss Dorothy by calling out 'Cracks in my legs!' as he caught a glimpse of them through his spy-glass. After this, it is hardly to be wondered at overmuch when the Admiral descends from his pedestal, and, with Dorothy, takes the 'Ferry for Nowhere.' The jolly cruise of the good ship 'Sideboard' through an enchanted forest; their stay at the Outside Inn, which, when you get inside, you find is inside out; and the curious botanical lore gleaned in Bob Scarlet's garden, the reader must learn of from Mr. Carroll himself. He will never regret the time so spent if he lives to be as old as the Admiral himself. ($1.50. The Century Co.)"
11. "Illustrated Holiday Books for Children". Review of Reviews. Vol. 6, no. 35. December 1892. p. 632. Retrieved 2024-02-04 – via Internet Archive.
  The review notes: ""The Admiral's Caravan" is reprinted from St. Nicholas with Mr. Birch's numerous irresistible illustrations as well. The admiral and part of the caravan appear in gold and colors on the cover, and will greet the eyes of a good many girls and boys at Christmas time—for Dorothy, the little heroine, fell asleep on Christmas day, and saw a great many wonderful and charming things on that dreamland trip. Mr. Carryl here kindly gives us a report of them, which the little folks by all means ought to hear."
12. "The Admiral's Caravan". Art Amateur. Vol. 28, no. 1. December 1892. p. 35. Retrieved 2024-02-04 – via Internet Archive.
  The review notes: "The Admiral's Caravan is a story the scene of which is laid in Dreamland. A little girl, Dorothy, a camel, a robin, a stork, a wooden admiral and a Highlander have a good deal to do and say during the progress of the story, and some of them make their observations in verse. Charles E. Carryl, the author, has imitated more closely the style of "Alice in Wonderland" than is commendable, but that will not be obvious to children, who will delight in the story and in Reginald Birch's spirited illustrations. The verse seems to us the best thing in the book. The song of the mouse is a piece of genuine poetry, and the lament of the camel is a bit of genuine humor. The volume is bound in gray cloth, with a cover in gold and colors. (The Century Co., $1.50.)"
13. "The Admiral's Caravan". The New York Times. Vol. 42, no. 12964. 1893-03-13. p. 3. Retrieved 2024-02-04 – via Internet Archive.
  The article notes: "The Admiral's Caravan, by Charles E. Carryl, which was originally published in St. Nicholas and afterward in book form by the Century Company, has been translated into Italian and issued at Milan by Birch in the Giornale dei Fanciulli, with all the illustrations."
14. "The Admiral's Caravan". The Independent. Vol. 44, no. 2292. 1892-11-03. p. 1564. Retrieved 2024-02-04 – via Internet Archive.
  The review notes: "The Admiral's Caravan. By Charles E. Carryl, author of "Davy and the Goblin," with Illustrations by Reginald B. Birch. (The Century Co., New York. $1.50.) This is another Dreamland fancy, from the author of "Alice in Wonderland," and "Behind the Looking Glass." Tho not equal to those immortal fictions, it is quite original in the conception of the "Admiral," and the wit and humor occasionally recall to the reader a strain the author has sung before. It has, however, a distinct tone and character of its own, and is very entertaining. The story is an amusing and extraordinary fiction reprinted from the St. Nicholas and illustrated with Birch's graceful and spirited inventions."
15. "The Admiral's Caravan". Boston Evening Transcript. 1892-10-28. Archived from the original on 2024-02-04. Retrieved 2024-02-04 – via Newspapers.com.
  The review notes: "The Admiral's Caravan. by Charles E. Carry, author of "Davy and the Goblin," is a book for little girls and boys. The scene of the story is laid in Dreamland, the principal characters being a little girl and a wooden admiral and his companions. There is also a camel who is fed on glue and laments his hard fate in verse. The story is reprinted from St. Nicholas, with all of Birch's charming illustrations, making a volume of 140 pages, bound in gray cloth, with the admiral and part of the caravan stamped in gold and colors on the cover. Published by the Century Company. New York."
16. "The Admiral's Caravan". Journal of Education. 36 (18 #893): 303. 1892-11-10. JSTOR 44037323.
  The review notes: "The Admiral's Caravan, a charming holiday book for smallest boys and girls, by Charles E Carryal, is reprinted from St. Nicholas. The scene is laid in Dreamland, and the adventures of pretty Dorothy, the wooden Admiral, and the camel who was fed on glue are such as will greatly interest the little ones. The volume is daintily illustrated by Birch, and has an illuminated cover. New York: The Century Co. Price, $1 50."
17. "Brief Mention: The Admiral's Caravan". Chicago Tribune. 1892-10-22. Archived from the original on 2024-02-04. Retrieved 2024-02-04 – via Newspapers.com.
  The review notes: ""The Admiral's Caravan," by Charles E. Carryl, originally appeared in St. Nicholas. In reviewing "Davy and the Goblin" by the same author we spoke of Mr. Carryl's indebtedness to Lewis Carroll, and in "The Admiral's Caravan" the resemblance to the Alice books is even more marked. It is easy to recognize the source of the strange transformations and changes of size, the quips and quibbles, the preposterous poetical rhapsodies that form the stock in trade of Mr. Carryl. But whatever may be thought of its originality, the book is exceedingly funny. The characters go sailing on a paragondola, dance the quadrupedrille, discipline an insubordinate camel who has the bad taste to grumble in rhyme, and incur a series of perils from the "ungovernerubble fury" of a revengful robin, Bob Scarlet by name. Mr. Birch's pictures are as clever as usual, but in some of them little Dorothy's mouth is too much like the ace of clubs. (New York: The Century company. $1.50.)"
18. Waldman, Scott (2012-11-21). "'Wicked' author donates papers to UAlbany". Times Union. Archived from the original on 2024-01-12. Retrieved 2024-02-04.
  The article notes: "The school already has an extensive collection of children's literature, some 15,000 titles that run from 1850 to 1960. Among the items displayed at a ceremony in the school's Science Library was Charles Carryl's 1891 book "The Admiral's Caravan," about a young girl named Dorothy who takes a journey with three wooden soldiers, which was published almost a decade before Frank Baum's "The Wonderful Wizard of Oz.""
19. "Holiday Juveniles". San Francisco Chronicle. 1892-10-30. p. 9. ProQuest 572690136.
  The article notes: "A pretty holiday book for children is "The Admiral's Caravan," by Charles E. Carryl, with illustrations by Reginald B. Burch. The story is full of quaint concerts interspersed with the most delightful songs, and Burch has added to the work of the author many charming sketches of little Dorothy and the queer people that she met in her adventures. The book has an attractive cover with a funny design in colors. [New York: The Century Company. For sale by A. M. Robertson, 126 Post street; price $1 50.]"
20. Reynolds, Neil (2007-12-28). "Acceptable nonsense from a broker". The Globe and Mail. Archived from the original on 2024-02-04. Retrieved 2024-02-04.
  The article notes: "As a writer of absurd and whimsical verse, Charles Edward Carryl fits somewhere between Lewis Carroll and Cole Porter - as these lines from his 1890s The Admiral's Caravan, a Christmas Eve adventure with a young girl named Dorothy and an assembly of dim-witted animals, demonstrates: ... He dedicated The Admiral's Caravan to his daughter Constance, saluting her as his "sweet chatterbox": ... These works are a treasury of silly and absurdist literary concoctions. In The Admiral's Caravan, heroine Dorothy picks up a lawyer's lost document labelled "Memorumdums.""
There is sufficient coverage in reliable sources to allow The Admiral's Caravan to pass Wikipedia:Notability#General notability guideline, which requires "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject".
Cunard (talk) 11:48, 4 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per reviews identified by Cunard. Toughpigs (talk) 11:54, 4 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per reviews identified by Cunard. -- Evertype·✆ 16:08, 4 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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.

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. Malcolmxl5 (talk) 23:28, 10 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Calbia

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

An unsourced article on a non-notable fictional location. I can find no actual significant coverage in reliable sources that discuss this fictional country - the best I can find are mentions in summaries of the one story it appeared in. As far as I can find, the reference to a Thomas Fortenberry making comparisons to Marvel Comics in the last paragraph is just based on comments on this page, which is obviously not a reliable source. As the one story that the location appeared in does not have an article on its own, I can find no suitable redirect targets as an WP:ATD. Rorshacma (talk) 23:17, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Fictional elements and Literature. Rorshacma (talk) 23:17, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Nothing relevant found at all, although Calbia is apparently also the name of a multivitamin supplement marketed in India: [5]. WeirdNAnnoyed (talk) 01:18, 4 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: No reliable sources exist for this unsourced article. The Thomas Fortenberry comparison originated from the comments under a blog post. Furthermore, a Google search indicates that the fictional location is not the primary topic for this term. ―Susmuffin ^Talk 10:01, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Per above. Be icaverraverra]] _talk 18:29, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete due to insufficient reliable sources. Shooterwalker (talk) 02:45, 10 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom and above. Okoslavia (talk) 08:01, 10 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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.

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. (non-admin closure)‎ Geschichte (talk) 06:11, 9 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Richard Gray (literary scholar)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:ANYBIO for the following reasons

1. https://www.ukwhoswho.com/display/10.1093/ww/9780199540884.001.0001/ww-9780199540884-e-17948 - just a directory so it's primary.

2. The Writer's Directory, vol. 31, part 6 (London: St. James Press, 2013), p. 1220. - Routine writers directory. Therefore, it's primary.

3. https://www.thebritishacademy.ac.uk/fellows/richard-gray-FBA/ - He works at The British Academy so it's not independent and it's primary.

Fails WP:NACADEMIC because he doesn't hold a named chair and The British Academy is not as prestigious as National Academy of Sciences or the Royal Society) or a fellow of a major scholarly society which reserves fellow status as a highly selective honor (e.g., Fellow of the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers or Honorary Fellow of the Institute of Physics. Plus, WP:Pokémon test may apply here. Signal Crayfish (talk) 17:22, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 17:40, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 17:40, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 17:40, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 17:40, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 17:42, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy keep, WP:SK3, stunningly bad and highly erroneous nomination statement. (1) ANYBIO is the wrong notability criterion; he should be evaluated by WP:PROF or WP:AUTHOR. (2) I see no evidence that "He works at The British Academy". The link given contradicts that, stating his current post as emeritus professor at the University of Essex. (3) FBA is a clear pass of WP:PROF#C3. The NAS and RS are for scientists; the BA is the corresponding institution to the RS for literary scholars, among others. (4) the nominator is very confused over whether coverage being "routine" makes it "primary" (no). And there is nothing excepting routine coverage in GNG. (5) A cursory search of JSTOR finds many reviews of his books, easily enough for WP:AUTHOR. —David Eppstein (talk) 17:58, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Can you take a look at the post about this on Signal Crayfish’s talk page? I am not sure they really understand notability and may have a battleground mentality. Thriley (talk) 18:17, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: WP:Pokémon test is not a serious argument for deletion. Whether the subject of this article is less "notable" than "an average Pokémon" is entirely subjective and has no factual basis. It's just a way of saying WP:IDONTLIKEIT. I don't think I've ever seen someone invoke that argument in multiple AfDs before. This is bad practice. Toughpigs (talk) 20:21, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Satisfies WP:PROF and WP:AUTHOR. James500 (talk) 08:37, 4 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Satisfies WP:NPROF and WP:ANYBIO as an FBA. -- Necrothesp (talk) 11:25, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep. Weak because the article as it stands certainly justifies the stub tag that was placed on it very recently. It needs some serious work to expand it into something more informative. Athel cb (talk) 09:22, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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.

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 redirect‎ to Abbott and Costello in Hollywood as it's now mentioned there, rendering this a viable ATD. Star Mississippi 17:42, 9 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Mammoth Studios

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

An article that appears to be mostly WP:OR and WP:SYNTH about a topic that, as far as I can see, does not pass the WP:GNG to begin with. Essentially, someone noticed that several different pieces of fiction used the same generic name for a fake movie studio company. However, this is not a cohesive topic - none of the examples are actually related to one another. There are no reliable sources in the article, as the only sources included are a couple of the pieces of media themselves. Searches did not turn up anything showing that the phenomenon of the same fake name being used multiple times is a subject that has had significant coverage in reliable sources. Rorshacma (talk) 16:06, 2 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Fictional elements, Film, and Television. Rorshacma (talk) 16:06, 2 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 16:20, 2 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 16:20, 2 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 16:21, 2 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 16:21, 2 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as WP:OR. I found some WP:TRIVIALMENTIONS for a real Mammoth Studios, but only in the context of interviewing a staffer about the film industry. The rest is unrelated, based on observations and theories by Wikipedia editors. Articles need to be based on reliable third-party sources, and not original research of noticing the same word across a few film/television scenes. Shooterwalker (talk) 16:22, 2 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 16:23, 2 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Abbott_and_Costello_in_Hollywood (either #Plot or #Production or even ad hoc section with sources such as this one or this one, indicating it's the MGM.) One can also think a Disambiguation page is suitable.-My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 19:19, 2 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - I'm fine with a redirect, if there was actually any content if the target - but there's not even a mention here. Nfitz (talk) 21:21, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It is mentioned now. I've added a different source, though, as the 2nd I had mentioned above was published at Lulu.com. But I've added it both in the plot and production sections. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 00:44, 4 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Abbott_and_Costello_in_Hollywood because content is now there in a section, as user My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) indicated. -AuthorAuthor (talk) 21:30, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Fails GNG. Mentions are not enough to demonostrate notability a fictional name used for fictional companies in a few unrelated movies. I think the article itself reflects the lack of SIGCOV, it is OR and trivia mixed in with some SYNTH. // Timothy :: talk 17:32, 9 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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.

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 redirect‎ to List of Oz books#Alternate Oz books. ✗plicit 00:52, 9 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Lion of Oz and the Badge of Courage

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I'm not finding any sources for this book, but it was turned into a movie, Lion of Oz. The sources for that are slim too, though. Newspapers.com turned up movie listings, but no reviews for the movie or the book. asilvering (talk) 00:31, 2 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. asilvering (talk) 00:31, 2 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Paul Simpson's A Brief Guide to Oz has a paragraph, part of which is about the movie.[6]
Perhaps this could be merged into the movie's page (but that has its own citation issues). Oblivy (talk) 02:12, 2 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think that's enough to show notability of the movie, but I'll go put that source into Lion of Oz for now anyway. -- asilvering (talk) 02:52, 2 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, yes I wasn't suggesting this is enough but I wanted to make a record since I had found a source (and little else) in case other participants can surface more results. Oblivy (talk) 03:12, 2 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to List of Oz books#Alternate Oz books, fails WP:NBOOK. --Mika1h (talk) 17:45, 2 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to List of Oz books#Alternate Oz books would be the best solution indeed. TH1980 (talk) 02:03, 4 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I agree.

Oblivy (talk) 02:09, 4 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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.

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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:48, 11 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Plot armor

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Seems to be more of a How-To Article than a Wikipedia article. ‍ Relativity 20:15, 31 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors, Fictional elements, and Literature. ‍ Relativity 20:15, 31 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

On August 18, 2020‎, I deleted a section of Plot device called "Plot armor" because it had been unreferenced for more than a year.—Anita5192 (talk) 20:50, 31 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) Comment The article is rather poor (though in fairness it was only created 12 minutes prior to the deletion nomination), but the concept is likely notable. That doesn't necessarily mean it should have a stand-alone article (might be better to cover it as part of some other article per WP:PAGEDECIDE), but it probably could. TompaDompa (talk) 20:52, 31 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: I'm going to bet myself a nickel that I can HEY this, per TompaDompa. It's a term in the common lexicon of modern popular media, so I'm almost certain that there is enough RS material out there to demonstrate notability. Expect improvements to come inside of 24 hours. ~ Pbritti (talk) 21:22, 31 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Not notable enough to warrant its own article. Might be worth reinserting section in plot device mentioned above but with a reliable source if findable. Rambling Rambler (talk) 23:00, 31 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Move to draft and improve. This is a highly notable trope in fiction, up there with the Mary Sue, but needs development to merit inclusion in mainspace. BD2412 T 00:14, 1 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: While I'm not in the literary scene, the Wikipedia Library got me access to a handful of sources that provided rudimentary definitions and examples of this concept. While what I've added to the article right now is probably only just on the cusp of demonstrating GNG (mostly a question of SIGCOV), I'm now certain this is notable. For the references lacking links, please refer to the Wikipedia Library. ~ Pbritti (talk) 05:57, 1 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Eh... I'm not convinced. The references amount to two literal dictionary definitions and a handful of sources that use the term as a descriptor. The expansion, though well intentioned, thus verges on original research. I'd want to see at least one reliable source that discusses the concept itself, in depth. Jfire (talk) 06:19, 1 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- The Somers and McGowan sources provide more explicit definitions of plot armor. Additionally, usage of the term in academic texts suggests its notability. Without access to the OED definition, I don't have the citations that they may have used to provide their definition. ~ Pbritti (talk) 06:35, 1 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  @Pbritti I don't think those citations are likely to be useful for showing notability anyway, since the OED's business is to find the earliest possible example, not to point readers to the most in-depth sources. -- asilvering (talk) 09:05, 2 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep if not then draftify, notable trope also something of note the page was created at 20:03, 31 January 2024, it was AFDed at 20:15 the same day. Questions? four Olifanofmrtennant (she/her) 19:17, 1 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Move to draft and improve. This concept needs several reputable sources. I am an amateur fiction writer, and I have never heard of this outside of Wikipedia.—Anita5192 (talk) 19:36, 1 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Pbritti has completely transformed this article. It is now encyclopedic and meets GNG. -- asilvering (talk) 09:03, 2 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete There isn't WP:SIGCOV for this. A few of the WP:TRIVIALMENTIONS aren't much more than a WP:DICTIONARY definition, and most are barely related to the concept at all. I wouldn't object to draftifying, but this seems like a WP:TNT situation where there isn't much to preserve. The "Articles for Creation" process is a good idea, and this would be an example of what not to do. Shooterwalker (talk) 16:14, 2 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. The current article sourcing looks good to me. The article could also be expanded further with coverage of plot armor in interactive media. I find an entire chapter on plot armor, called "Plot Armor", in this book about role-playing games. The chapter itself is not in the free preview but it's listed in the table of contents; based on the author's discussion of fixed points in time here (a chapter that references the plot armor chapter) I believe it's a proper SIGCOV analysis of how the trope itself functions. There's also a page of analysis of plot armor on p 98 of this essay, also not readable to me right now. My search preview says "The only way Mercer could prevent queer death in Critical Role would be by giving certain characters Plot Armor, a trope where “a main character’s life and health are safeguarded by …" -- in context this section is leading up to a substantial analysis of character death, in which the plot armor trope will be examined for its narrative implications. In other words, both sources present analysis rather than trivial mentions. ~ L 🌸 (talk)
There are several other similar books that document this concept (and the similar plot immunity) but most appear to be self-published or come from publishers that don't possess formal editorial oversight. I refrained from using these sources when I expanded the article, preferring limited coverage in RSs. I wonder if there is SOGCOV in print texts from RS publishers that we're missing, though. ~ Pbritti (talk) 17:24, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: At this point, the sourcing is sufficient. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cortador (talk • contribs) 12:10, 4 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Like the keep opinions before me, I see now enough sourced material for an article beyond a dictionary definition. Currently it is not a very long article, but no good merge target comes to mind. Daranios (talk) 16:18, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to protagonist, what is here is largely a dictionary definition. Generally speaking, "plot armor" tends to involve the protagonists escaping harm repeatedly because they are important to the story. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 17:03, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Meets notability and SIGCOV. The Herald (Benison) (talk) 07:01, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 03:55, 8 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: Has decent sourcing, is a notable concept. It comes up a lot in discussions about media such as video games. StreetcarEnjoyer (talk) 19:07, 8 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, per the massive improvements that have been made since the beginning of this discussion. On another note, nominating an article on a subject like this for deletion (that isn't promotion, spam, etc -- a topic which is mentioned and talked about pretty broadly, and which WP:BEFORE revealed a wealth of sources for) twelve minutes after its creation seems like rather bad manners to me. jp×g 🗯️ 03:50, 9 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per the work put in by Pbritti. I concur with the assessment from BD2412 that this is functionally at the same (or near same) literary level as Mary Sue, and I'm satisfied with the present sourcing. I also echo the sentiments of JPxG that nominating an article for deletion within ~12 minutes of it's creation should generally be avoided for the future, barring the exceptions noted. —Sirdog (talk) 05:54, 9 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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.

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. ✗plicit 23:39, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Diagnostics of Karma

AfDs for this article:

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

No evidence of notability added since the first nomination for this pseudoscientific nonsense. In the previous keepers' nom says "There are many independent and authoritative sources"; well I found no WP:RS that fit enwiki requirements. - Altenmann >talk 16:53, 30 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 16:56, 30 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Russia-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 16:56, 30 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Philosophy, Religion, Spirituality, Science, and Psychology. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 20:47, 30 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, asilvering (talk) 18:41, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Ineligible for soft deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 23:46, 13 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete All the sources and links are primary and I don't see any way this passes WP:BOOKCRIT nor WP:GNG. I cannot locate any appropriate sources. LizardJr8 (talk) 05:04, 14 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:24, 20 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per WP:SIGCOV. Featuring a book on tee vee, or a book tour, are not evidence per se of notability. This article by itself doesn't fit into any regular category, and would have to be extensively edited to make sense. 19:05, 26 February 2024 (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.

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. (non-admin closure) The Herald (Benison) (talk) 03:52, 14 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sunnydale High Yearbook

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Subject fails WP:NBOOK Chris Troutman (talk) 00:46, 30 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Science fiction and fantasy and Television. Chris Troutman (talk) 00:46, 30 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to List of Buffy the Vampire Slayer novels as a section. BD2412 T 01:07, 30 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, plot summaries are allowed without sourcing (the plot makes up the better part of the page) and Buffy as a topic is notable per its being taught in multiple college level courses. If merged, on the other hand, do closers or nominators assure that it is an accurate merge with almost all of the pertinent information being brought over (including the plot)? The plot and other information on this unsourced page has been seen by multiple editors and readers, many of them canon fans of Buffy, without anyone pointing out existing obvious errors in the descriptor or the in-universe plot. Randy Kryn (talk) 01:37, 30 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Plot summaries may be allowed without sourcing, but articles consisting primarily thereof are explicitly not. Per WP:PRIMARY: Do not base an entire article on primary sources, and be cautious about basing large passages on them. See also MOS:WAF. The notability of the franchise is a red herring, as it has no bearing on whether this topic should have a stand-alone article. TompaDompa (talk) 06:11, 30 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Fictional elements and Literature. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 03:42, 30 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to List of Buffy the Vampire Slayer novels#Buffy season 3, like it was in December. Deleting sub-topics when they could be redirected is not helpful. - Sumanuil. _{(talk to me)} 05:01, 30 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to List of Buffy the Vampire Slayer novels#Buffy season 3 - The article is unsourced, and I'm not finding much in the way of coverage in reliable sources. This short piece is the only review I can find, making this a failure of WP:NBOOK. Rorshacma (talk) 07:54, 30 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect per Rorshacma. Not finding enough sources for WP:SIGCOV. Not much to preserve, but it's a valid redirect term, and can be covered at the target article. Shooterwalker (talk) 21:23, 1 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as it has sufficient RS coverage:

“

Other paratexts followed, including the 1999 release of Sunnydale High Yearbook, co-authored by tie-in phenoms Christopher Golden and Nancy Holder. The Yearbook is designed with verisimilitude in mind, as if it is an actual high school yearbook—complete with “signatures” on the inside front and back covers, “handwritten” notes throughout, and descriptions of school events from the show’s diegesis such as Halloween, the Talent Show, the Sadie Hawkins Dance, and the Spring Fling, accompanied, of course, with pictures from the corresponding episodes as if they had been taken by the yearbook committee. Transmedial by nature, both of these kinds of paratexts suggest a life for the show beyond its televisual borders. Obviously, BtVS did not invent these kind of paratexts; other shows such as Twin Peaks and The X-Files had companion books and guides, too, but situated temporally as it was within the nascent phenomenon of online fandom, the paratextual BtVS experience was highly influential in how later shows—particularly those aimed at the 18–35 demographic—were wooed through such cultural products.

”

[7] footnotes omitted from quote.

Negative review in EW.

Enduring coverage via a 20th anniversary article mention: "Additionally there’s a “Sunnydale High Yearbook Contest” across the country where the grand prize is a trip to San Diego for Comic Con. All fans have to do is upload their high school class photos to Twitter and Facebook with their best Buffy caption in the form of a “senior quote.”" THR.

Overall WP:NBOOK #1 is met. Jclemens (talk) 22:04, 4 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - I don't think that last source is about this book - its about a contest that occurred on social media in 2017, and the book that this article is about was released in 1999. That first source is also very short on actual coverage on the book - the part you quoted is basically the entirety of the coverage in the entire paper on the book, which I don't believe is WP:SIGCOV. Rorshacma (talk) 16:52, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This is probably correct, but if we are going to cover successive references to a fictional yearbook from a rather popular high-school-based (well, at least the first three seasons) show, this is where it would go. That is, even if this aspect of the topic isn't covered by the current article that focuses only on the specific tie-in product, it would be covered in a thoroughly complete encyclopedia article by this title. Jclemens (talk) 04:03, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Keep or redirect?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 08:55, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

User:Cunard, any thoughts? --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 00:07, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Excellent ping. I know of no editor who is better able to find RS book reviews: if it's there, Cunard can find it. Jclemens (talk) 06:18, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the ping and the kind words. Cunard (talk) 10:59, 8 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per the significant coverage in multiple independent reliable sources. Wikipedia:Notability (books)#Criteria says:
A book is presumed notable if it verifiably meets, through reliable sources, at least one of the following criteria:
1. The book has been the subject of two or more non-trivial published works appearing in sources that are independent of the book itself. This can include published works in all forms, such as newspaper articles, other books, television documentaries, bestseller lists, and reviews. This excludes media re-prints of press releases, flap copy, or other publications where the author, its publisher, agent, or other self-interested parties advertise or speak about the book.
Sources
1. Macnaughtan, Don (2011). The Buffyverse Catalog: A Complete Guide to Buffy the Vampire Slayer and Angel in Print, Film, Television, Comics, Games and Other Media, 1992–2010. Jefferson, North Carolina: McFarland & Company. ISBN 978-1-4766-2207-1. Retrieved 2024-02-08 – via Google Books.
  The book notes: "Golden, Christopher, and Nancy Holder. Sunnydale High Yearbook. New York: Simon, 1999. Print. 112p. A fully realized fake yearbook for the Sunnydale High graduating class of '99, many of whom survived the graduation ceremony and went on to future careers. There are reports on Homecoming, including runners-up Cordelia Chase and Buffy Summers, Homecoming fashion perspectives from Harmony Kendall, and reports from the chess, computer, dance, and drama clubs. There are updates on prime student hangouts around Sunnydale, including The Bronze, the Zoo, Putters' Green, the Mall, and the Sun Cinema. The swim team had an unfortunate year, with the coach and several members mysteriously missing. The "In Memoriam” section at the back is inevitably rather long, and includes Herbert the Pig, school mascot. On the bright side, the school had the lowest annual mortality rate in recent history."
2. Baldwin, Kristen (1999-11-19). "Buffy the Vampire Slayer: Sunnydale High Yearbook". Entertainment Weekly. EBSCOhost 2502762. Archived from the original on 2024-02-08. Retrieved 2024-02-08.
  The review notes: "Ultimately, Yearbook scrapes the bottom of the trivia sarcophagus: Even having seen every episode, I couldn’t place some of the so-called key references, like the endless rosters of Sunnydale’s sports teams. About as informative as a rerun—and not nearly as entertaining. C-"
3. Kushman, Rick (1999-11-28). "Music gifts a big part of the TV picture. CDs aplenty for shows new and old; there's even a high-school yearbook". The Sacramento Bee. Archived from the original on 2024-02-08. Retrieved 2024-02-08 – via Newspapers.com.
  The article notes: "... this year there's one gift that will make you look smart, funny and cool. And, really, that's why we give gifts, isn't it? To look cool? It's "The Sunnydale High 1999 Yearbook" (Pocket Books, $16.95). That's the school that just graduated Buffy Summers, the once-in-a-generation slayer, enemy of vampires, demons and other evil creatures with bad skin. What we've got here is one of the best TV tie-in gifts in years, a clever connection to "Buffy the Vampire Slayer" that's as ironic as the series. To sum up the year, the yearbook gushes: "We're proud to say the class of '99 has the lowest mortality rate of any graduating class." It's hard to compete with that kind of achievement, but here are a few more gift ideas for people who just love TV. It comes with senior class photos and summaries, pictures of activities (proms, graduation, demon attacks), and autographs to Buffy (Willow wrote: "You made me grow. Not in a getting bigger way. Another way.")."
4. Graves, Stephanie A. (2019). "The Transtextual Road Trip: Buffy the Vampire Slayer, Supernatural, and Televisual Forebears". In Kitchens, Juliette C.; Hawk, Julie (eds.). Transmediating the Whedonverse(s). Cham: Palgrave Macmillan. p. 190. doi:10.1007/978-3-030-24616-7_8. ISBN 978-3-030-24615-0. Retrieved 2024-02-08 – via Internet Archive.
  The book notes: "Other paratexts followed, including the 1999 release of Sunnydale High Yearbook, co-authored by tie-in phenoms Christopher Golden and Nancy Holder. The Yearbook is designed with verisimilitude in mind, as if it is an actual high school yearbook—complete with "signatures" on the inside front and back covers, "handwritten" notes throughout, and descriptions of school events from the show's diegesis such as Halloween, the Talent Show, the Sadie Hawkins Dance, and the Spring Fling, accompanied, of course, with pictures from the corresponding episodes as if they had been taken by the yearbook committee. Transmedial by nature, both of these kinds of paratexts suggest a life for the show beyond its televisual borders."
5. "Albany Public Library offers new books". Corvallis Gazette-Times. 2000-04-30. Archived from the original on 2024-02-08. Retrieved 2024-02-08 – via Newspapers.com.
  The article notes: "Young adult. Sunnydale High Yearbook, by Christopher Golden and Nancy Holder, 1999. Even though Buffy and her crew have immersed themselves in college life, at times they will feel nostalgic for their former high school. Because the actual building is a huge mass of charred rubble, they will have to turn to the Sunnydale High Yearbook to relive their memories. And now so can you. Buffy's yearbook, complete with color pictures, messages from classmates and an "in memoriam" section that lists people who fell to the evil in Sunnydale, is available for you to look at."
There is sufficient coverage in reliable sources to allow Sunnydale High Yearbook to pass Wikipedia:Notability#General notability guideline, which requires "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject".
Cunard (talk) 10:59, 8 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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.

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. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 10:04, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of Puddle Lane books

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

De-PRODded by IP, who gave no rationale. PROD reason below:

WP:NOTDATABASE. Topic is discussed (briefly, but still in more depth than on this list) at Puddle Lane. No redirect required (unusual search term, no incoming links aside from Puddle Lane and Lists of books). asilvering (talk) 20:19, 29 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Literature, Lists, and United Kingdom. asilvering (talk) 20:19, 29 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per the significant coverage in multiple independent reliable sources. Wikipedia:Notability (books)#Criteria says:
A book is presumed notable if it verifiably meets, through reliable sources, at least one of the following criteria:
1. The book has been the subject of two or more non-trivial published works appearing in sources that are independent of the book itself. This can include published works in all forms, such as newspaper articles, other books, television documentaries, bestseller lists, and reviews. This excludes media re-prints of press releases, flap copy, or other publications where the author, its publisher, agent, or other self-interested parties advertise or speak about the book.
Sources
1. Ashworth, Linda (April 1986). "Reviews: Puddle Lane". Child Education. Vol. 63, no. 4. ISSN 0009-3947. Retrieved 2024-02-04 – via Internet Archive.
  The article notes: "The free guide for parents is very good. The information is given clearly in layman's terms and the advice is sound. It emphasises the importance of story, shared enjoyment and choice. There is also good advice in every book in case parents haven't read the guide ... But what about the books themselves? The stories seem tame and don't stand up to reading aloud. They have been written to teach the children to read, not by an author simply wanting to tell a story. Aesthetically the books don't come up to the standard of picture story books by authors such as Anthony Browne, Pat Hutchins or Maurice Sendak. The Ladybird format kills any possibility of individuality or originality of presentation. Although the subject matter of the books-magic, fantasy, toys coming to life — usually captures children's imagination, these stories are just not up to the standard of Tim and the Hidden People. The language structures are not so artificial as to hinder children's anticipatory skills but some of the text is very stilted."
  The article notes: "However, the main market for Puddle Lane is parents with pre-school children. Where parents have bought the books, their children will come into school with Puddle Lane forming a significant part of their literary experience. And there can be no doubt that parents will buy it. A television series is always a high motivator to buy the books, both for children and adults. Books can be bought in a pack with an accompanying tape — always a welcome aid to busy parents and teachers alike. The books are cheap (75p each), durable (hardback) and readily available."
2. "Fantasy world of Puddle Lane, but rewards are real". Leicester Mercury. 1985-09-30. Archived from the original on 2024-02-04. Retrieved 2024-02-04 – via Newspapers.com.
  The Puddle Lane stories are grouped in four stages (a fifth is on the way) and the books are colour coded at each stage. The programme is geared to children from three-and-a-half to six-and-a-half, and the early books are laid out so that the story is printed on the left hand page for the adult to read to the child. Illustrations, by a team of five artists brought in for the series are an integral part of the programme. ... The stories are set in the fantasy world of Puddle Lane in Candletown with a magician a family of cats who live in his garden, a strange but Friendly monster, the Griffle, who can vanish leaving only his ears and eyes or his tail showing, and four children — Sarah, Davy, Hari and Gita, who also have adventures in Puddle Lane."
3. Dakin, Bridget (1985-09-13). "Open a page to walk down Puddle Lane". Loughborough Echo. Archived from the original on 2024-02-04. Retrieved 2024-02-04 – via Newspapers.com.
  The article notes: "This week they launched the Puddle Lane series — a colourful and imaginative newcomer to the shelves designed to make learning fun. ... So tales from Puddle Lane are simple to follow with colourful illustrations to help youngsters create the imaginary world in their own minds. The programme is designed for children aged between three-and-half and six-and-a-half. It has five stages, each with several books of the same reading level. The story is printed on the left-hand page of each book for the adult to first read to the child. Below illustrations on the right-hand pages are words or simple sentences which the child is encouraged to read itself when the adult goes through the story a second time."
4. Hammerton, Geoff (1985-09-23). "Magic approach has them reading early". Derby Evening Telegraph. Archived from the original on 2024-02-04. Retrieved 2024-02-04 – via Newspapers.com.
  The article notes: "Puddle Lane, as its catchphrase says, is where children learn to read. Twelve titles, some at each of the four levels of the scheme, are out immediately at the standard price of 75p. Already there has been a tie up with Pickwick International, the record company, which has added Puddle Lane to its Tell-a-Tale bookcassette."
5. "New books aim to stem teaching cutbacks". Loughborough Echo. 1985-08-30. Archived from the original on 2024-02-04. Retrieved 2024-02-04 – via Newspapers.com.
  The article notes: "The Puddle Lane stories have a mystical setting guaranteed to capture infants' imagination and interest. They have also caught the eye of Yorkshire Television whose new children's series based on the books is due to be screened from October. Animals, a magician and even a strange, vanishing monster feature. And in case anyone tries to accuse Ladybird of being racist, the Puddle Lane children are Sarah and Davy and their ethnic friends, Hari and Gita. ... The first 12 books from Puddle Lane are launched on September 12. It will be two years before the whole series of 54 books is on the shelves."
6. "Trip down Puddle Lane". The Bookseller. No. 5218. 2006-02-24. p. 9. EBSCOhost 20214617.
  The article notes: "Publisher Mercury Junior is to bring early readers series Puddle Lane back into print. The publisher has signed a deal with author Sheila McCullagh, whose library of over 300 titles includes the Puddle Lane series, televised during the early 1980s with a series of tie-in titles published by Ladybird. Mercury Junior will target parents who grew up watching the series. The deal was agented by Annie Quigly."
7. Root, Betty (1986-03-21). "Alive and well and living in schools. Reports of the death of reading schemes are extremely premature, says Betty Root, who looks at some new examples". The Times Educational Supplement. Retrieved 2024-02-04 – via Internet Archive.
  The article notes: "Puddle Lane. This new reading programme written especially for parents to use in the home, has already been reviewed on these pages. Though this review was unfavourable, evidence from a very wide spectrum of parents and children confirm the overwhelming popularity of Puddle Lane. Tim and Tobías have been voted by hundreds of teachers as some of the most popular stories to bo found in any classroom. The same imaginative flair is contained in the new Ladybird series and Puddle Lane is a world children will enjoy reading about."
8. Root, Betty (1986). In Defence of Reading Schemes. Reading: Reading and Language Information Centre. University of Reading. p. 8. ISBN 0-7049-0366-0. Retrieved 2024-02-04 – via Internet Archive.
  The book notes: "Puddle Lane. Ladybird 1985. This extensive new reading programme is aimed specifically at the parent market and certainly breaks new ground in many ways. All 55 books have been written by Sheila McCullagh, an established and highly respected children's writer. The books have a variety of support materials, all reasonably priced. Teachers, parents and children will delight in these stories which create, so successfully, an imaginary world yet contain characters both animals and human to whom the young readers can relate. With the provision of context support in the early stages — adults read the long story and children the shorter version — the books will tolerate reading over and over again. Thus building the confidence of children first learning to read. In everyway Puddle Lane has changed the image of Ladybird readers."
There is sufficient coverage in reliable sources to allow the Puddle Lane book series to pass Wikipedia:Notability#General notability guideline, which requires "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject".
Cunard (talk) 09:17, 4 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per Cunard's sources. Also, WP:NOTADATABASE says nothing about bibliographies. Toughpigs (talk) 11:51, 4 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment (nom): Cunard's sources do not address the purpose of this AfD. They are sources for a hypothetical afd against Puddle Lane, which is not up for deletion. The article for discussion here is List of Puddle Lane books. -- asilvering (talk) 01:24, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
In that case, should you be proposing a merge rather than a deletion? There's Reception information on the List of Puddle Lane books that could go on Puddle Lane. AfD is not cleanup. Toughpigs (talk) 08:19, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Puddle Lane is about a television programme. List of Puddle Lane books is about the book series. The sources I provided are about the book series, not the television programme. Cunard (talk) 09:16, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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.

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 no consensus‎. I don't see a consensus here. If it was up to me, I'd suggest considering a merge or draftification but that is not an AFD closure decision. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:50, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thajuddin

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

The article is about Chera Perumals of Makotai and specially it covers Legend of Cheraman Perumals and it already covered about Thajuddin. But the current article is not give reliable source and some sources NOT directly confirm certain events. Splitting of the Moon is a believe, not historical and scientific event. Did Thajuddin lived during the time of Muhammad or after Mohamed? Legend of Cheraman Perumals already cover the topic and no need to have another non proven person. Antan O 18:26, 29 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of History-related deletion discussions. Antan O 18:26, 29 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Tamil Nadu-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 18:41, 29 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 18:41, 29 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 18:41, 29 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Religion-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 18:42, 29 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 18:42, 29 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Islam-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 18:43, 29 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The inclusion of Thajuddin's page in Wikipedia is justified as it encapsulates a significant historical and cultural figure. While acknowledging the challenges regarding source reliability, Thajuddin represents a figure of substantial folklore and tradition, contributing to the rich tapestry of cultural narratives. Despite the debate surrounding the historical accuracy of certain events attributed to him, his presence in historical discussions provides insight into the socio-political milieu of his time. Thajuddin's purported existence, whether contemporaneous with or postdating Muhammad, offers a lens through which to explore the interplay of legend and history in the broader narrative of the Cheraman Perumals and their era. Therefore, his inclusion fosters a more comprehensive understanding of the cultural heritage and historical discourse surrounding the Cheraman Perumals of Makotai. DonParlo (talk) 19:57, 29 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Checkuser note: DonParlo is the same person as the socks below --Blablubbs (talk) 02:41, 11 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Kings are automatically notable. Somebody moved the article to Draft. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 01:18, 30 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - Kings are notable. But, Why this duplicate page (Chera Perumals of Makotai and Legend of Cheraman Perumals)? Already this article was declined. User already mentioned it as folklore and tradition, and it already covered in Legend of Cheraman Perumals. There is no reliable source, and the reliable sources point to Cheraman Perumal, not so called Thajuddin who met Muhammad (from Kerala to Mecca). --Antan O 11:26, 31 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I understand the concern about potential duplication and the classification of the topic as folklore and tradition, but the existence of a separate page dedicated to Thajuddin, who purportedly met Muhammad, serves to provide a focused platform for exploring this aspect of Kerala's history and its cultural narratives. While it may be acknowledged as folklore, documenting such narratives contributes to the broader understanding of regional legends and their cultural significance. Moreover, although sources may vary in reliability, the presence of differing accounts underscores the diversity of perspectives and interpretations within historical discourse. As such, maintaining a distinct page for Thajuddin allows for a nuanced examination of this figure and his alleged encounter, enriching the discourse surrounding Kerala's historical and cultural landscape. The article in Legend of Cheraman Perumals does not cover this Legend in detail. DonParlo (talk) 23:43, 31 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

//Thajuddin, who purportedly met Muhammad, serves to provide a focused platform for exploring this aspect of Kerala's history and its cultural narratives// Can you give reliable source for such claim? --Antan O 15:14, 2 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

^ O. Loth, Arabic Manuscripts in the Library of the India Office (London: Secretary of State of India, 1877), no. 1044.

^ Jump up to:a b c d e f g Y. Friedmann, "Qissat Shakarwati Farmad: A Tradition Concerning the Introduction of Islam to Malabar", Israel Oriental Studies 5 (1975), 239-241.

^ Jump up to:a b c d e f Prange, Sebastian R. Monsoon Islam: Trade and Faith on the Medieval Malabar Coast. Cambridge University Press, 2018. 95-98.

^ Y. Friedmann, "Qissat Shakarwati Farmad: A Tradition Concerning the Introduction of Islam to Malabar", Israel Oriental Studies 5 (1975), 239-241.

^ H. H. Wilson, Mackenzie Collection. A descriptive catalogue of the Oriental manuscripts and other articles illustrative of the literature, history, statistics and antiquities of the south of India (Calcutta, 1828), II, appendix, p. XCV.

^ Prange, Sebastian R. Monsoon Islam: Trade and Faith on the Medieval Malabar Coast. Cambridge University Press, 2018. 98. DonParlo (talk) 20:29, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

https://www.scribd.com/document/519315791/Qissat-Shakarwati-Farmad-a-Tradition-Con DonParlo (talk) 20:44, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting for clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Herald (Benison) (talk) 10:51, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If you look at this objectively this wiki page does not do that much significant to anything. So what's the point of deleting it. I think people should keep this page. Is it gives a deeper insight into the legend. ஸ்டீவன் ஸ்கால் (talk) 15:19, 7 February 2024 (UTC) WP:SOCKSTRIKE --Blablubbs (talk) 02:41, 11 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. To begin with the subject of the page Thajuddin, there is no reference that it was formerly called Tamil King Cheraman Perumal. More so, there are contentious websites and some references that are just scraps as if someone did a Google search to find a word and used it as a testimony for a much larger paragraph. I find it impossible to verify the paragraphs from the references given. RangersRus (talk) 22:36, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Legend of Cheraman Perumals. The legend of the introduction of Islam to India is certainly notable, but the present article presents this legend as fact. The Legend of Cheraman Perumals article can be expanded with the specific events in the legend (the vision of the split moon and the pilgrimage to Mecca) if Indian historiographic sources are sufficient to verify that this is, in fact, part of the known legend. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 16:28, 8 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge would be good, but need to cleanup per RS. Antan O 19:57, 23 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sock !votes --Blablubbs (talk) 02:41, 11 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.

Keep: It is a important to keep this page as it expands on the over all legend and story of Thajuddin putting it in other pages such as the Legend of Cheraman Perumals doesn't do it justice. — Preceding unsigned comment added by சரோகம (talk • contribs) 22:08, 8 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep: Keeping the wiki page on Thajuddin's existence is justified for several reasons. Firstly, Thajuddin is a figure recognized by Islamic scholars, lending credibility to his historical existence. Numerous Arabic texts, including works like the Qissat Shakarwati-Farmad, reference him, along with recorded hadiths attributed to Abu Sa’id al-Khudri. Moreover, the presence of a tomb dedicated to Thajuddin in Oman serves as tangible evidence supporting his existence. Therefore, considering the scholarly acknowledgment, textual references, and physical evidence, maintaining the wiki page on Thajuddin is logical and warranted.
ManOfJusticekk (talk) 05:20, 9 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: As per nomination and heavy involvements of SOCKS --~AntanO4task (talk) 07:08, 9 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Last relisting did not establish any clear consensus, but only few sock votes. Relisting again for clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Herald (Benison) (talk) 05:21, 14 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Herald (Benison) (talk) 02:55, 22 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: This is a confusing mess. The discussion above is all over the place, the sourcing seems odd. TNT is probably best. Could draft it, but we'd need to start from zero again. Oaktree b (talk) 15:56, 22 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep and Edit: People should keep the wiki page of Thajuddin even if it is poorly sourced because it provides a starting point for further research and discussion, potentially leading to the improvement of the page's quality over time. According to Wikipedia's verifiability policy, "Information provided in an article must be verifiable and cited to reliable sources, even if it is not actually footnoted in the article." This means that while poorly sourced information should be improved, the existence of the page itself is justified as long as efforts are made to enhance its reliability and accuracy. தமிழ் வீரன் ஜைத் (talk) 13:31, 22 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Sending it to draft would better suit what you're describing. Oaktree b (talk) 21:09, 22 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You ID seems new and your edit patterns are similar as per above socks. Antan O 19:55, 23 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I am from India I use a VPN it sends me to random places I don't edit much as I just started this account I only fix spelling errors usually. தமிழ் வீரன் ஜைத் (talk) 03:23, 25 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Kings area always notable, and a first king to embrace a religion is absolutely notable. The article needs work for sure, but that doesn't justify deletion. DarmaniLink (talk) 18:55, 23 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I think you didn't see the duplicate page that already exist with primary name. AntanO 19:53, 23 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge into Legend of Cheraman Perumals DarmaniLink (talk) 20:06, 23 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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.

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 which does not precluder a rename/scope which is a matter of editorial discretion Star Mississippi 02:27, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sister Pelagia

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Nothing in the article suggests this character is notable, my BEFORE finds little of use. No Russian interwiki. The article is unreferenced (no footnotes). Maybe it could be rewritten into an article about a series (Sister Pleagia series) based on reviews or analysis of the series (this might be useful: [8]); sources are more likely to exist in Russian than English. If the article is not improved, however, due to failures of WP:V, WP:GNG and possible WP:OR, per WP:ATD-R I suggest this is redirected to the article about the author. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 01:40, 29 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Fictional elements, Literature, Christianity, and Russia. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 01:40, 29 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: This article already is about the series; all three books redirect to this page. I easily found reviews for all three books. "A nun with a nose for adventure" (Los Angeles Times, Jan 2007), "Nun has sleuth skills, feminist views" (Philadelphia Inquirer, May 2008), "Eye-popping stuff" (The Independent, Nov 2009). Russian language skills are not necessary. Toughpigs (talk) 01:57, 29 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Toughpigs If the books are notable, they merit stand-alone articles, sure, but here we discuss the fictional character. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 02:58, 29 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
All of the books pages redirect to this page. This is the series page. It would be silly to delete the series page and then create stand-alone pages for each book. Toughpigs (talk) 03:06, 29 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep These are really rather well-known books, translated into several languages, and doubtless with many reviews. I simply don't believe that a properly-done "BEFORE finds little of use" (did you make the same typo you do above?). If you think the article should be renamed Sister Pelagia series, do a RM. At the very least a merger to the author should be proposed. No valid deletion rationale given, just the usual chaff-storm of non-relevant policy shortcuts. Johnbod (talk) 03:47, 29 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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.

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. Xymmax ^{So let it be written} _{So let it be done} 02:15, 16 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Savage Press

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

It's been tagged as no sources since 2017, and an additional search of a local news database also had no hits. Fails WP:SIGCOV. ~ฅ(ↀωↀ=)neko-chan^nyan 15:58, 24 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies and Wisconsin. ~ฅ(ↀωↀ=)neko-chan^nyan 15:58, 24 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. What do You think about this piece? --Ouro (blah blah) 17:15, 24 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for finding something, but it looks like a single sentence about the publishing company, the rest is about an unrelated book the publisher wrote. I think that falls under 'trivial passing mention.' ~ฅ(ↀωↀ=)neko-chan^nyan 17:48, 24 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I altered my search parameters and found this interview with a long-standing blog, a mention here and another mention in the same publication I first found. None of these are awesome, but maybe together they could count for something? --Ouro (blah blah) 17:58, 24 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Just noticed that the article contradicts itself as to the date of the first publication. --Ouro (blah blah) 17:59, 24 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm starting to think it would make more sense to make an entry focused on Mike Savage instead and just redirect this to a section on the publishing company, since he looks pretty prolific. --~ฅ(ↀωↀ=)neko-chan^nyan 20:24, 24 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. Skynxnex (talk) 20:32, 24 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I followed Your train of thought, but in all honesty thoroughly searching for reviews of his Alphonse 'Dave' Davecki series of superior mystery book that seem to follow a sort of series brought up a total of zip reviews other than the mentions I have already found. While he may be prolific there's nothing going for that except for the blurbs in his books. What You found is actually from his own book, from his own publishing house, so isn't exactly a reliable source for WP. Maybe You'll have better luck or will just plain find something. --Ouro (blah blah) 07:01, 25 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 23:29, 31 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Independent coverage found so far falls well short of WP:ORGDEPTH required under NCORP. Yes, there's mentions in blogs but no WP:SIGCOV of the business, Savage Press. Rupples (talk) 19:52, 4 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 01:59, 8 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: the only article I found with information about the company was "Small publishers survive, but don't thrive in Duluth, Minn." in 2004 (ProQuest 462151451) but it relies on Mike Savage's comments. S0091 (talk) 17:08, 15 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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.

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. Star Mississippi 14:50, 9 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Hazaras

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Delete and redirect to Hazaras. Fails WP:NBOOKS. As part of WP:BEFORE, checked sourcing on interlanguage links as well but failed to turn up sources or coverage that would meet notability. Longhornsg (talk) 06:36, 15 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Literature and Afghanistan. Longhornsg (talk) 06:36, 15 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 08:47, 22 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Longhornsg: all the articles in other languages were created a few years after the English one and they seem a copy of it. I would have initially suggested that, based on the lack on online sources, the book fail to meet notability criteria. On the other hand, it's a rather old (1989) specialized book, which might have been mentioned in offline sources around the time of publishing. It surely makes no sense to have two separate entries for the author, Hassan Poladi, and the book, but I can't decide which of the two pages should be redirected. --Broc (talk) 10:30, 22 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Fails to meet WP:NBOOKS.RomanRaju (talk) 11:23, 22 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per the significant coverage in multiple independent reliable sources. Wikipedia:Notability (books)#Criteria says:
A book is presumed notable if it verifiably meets, through reliable sources, at least one of the following criteria:
1. The book has been the subject of two or more non-trivial published works appearing in sources that are independent of the book itself. This can include published works in all forms, such as newspaper articles, other books, television documentaries, bestseller lists, and reviews. This excludes media re-prints of press releases, flap copy, or other publications where the author, its publisher, agent, or other self-interested parties advertise or speak about the book.
Sources
1. Canfield, Robert L. (May 1990). Siegfried, Mary Ann (ed.). "The Hazäras, Hassan Poladi, Stockton CA, Mughal Publishing Co., 1989. Pp. xvi + 431, index. (Distributed through Avenue Books, 840 W. Benjamin Holt Drive, Stockton, CA 95207) $19.95". Afghanistan Forum. Vol. 18, no. 3. Asia Society. pp. 34–35. ISSN 0889-2148. Retrieved 2024-01-28 – via Internet Archive.
  From this 1 December 2016 obituary^{Internet Archive} for Mary Ann Siegfried, the editor of the Afghanistan Forum: ""After two years, she returned home to Ohio via freighter and soon set out for New York City, where she landed a job with the Asia Society. The nonprofit’s mission was to introduce Americans to Asia, “since most people didn’t even know where it was,” she told The Star. Through editing the society’s newsletter on Afghanistan, The Afghanistan Forum, for more than 25 years, she became an expert on that country.""
  The book review notes: "Poladi was not a polished scholar and the book has certain weaknesses. He has assembled and attempted to use virtually everything he could find on his subject; hence, the inclusion of some unnecessary material. The comments of poorly informed travelers are treated with the same respect as the measured reports of thorough scholars. Nevertheless, after extensive summaries of such diverse works he usually comes to defensible conclusions of his own, and, despite his evident apologetic purpose, he presents a reasonable and plausible image of the Hazara experience. Indeed, weaknesses aside, this book is a rich mine of information on the Hazaras, for Poladi's inclusion of everything that is known about them makes it an incomparable source on the subject. The book is a kind of final utterance of Hassan Poladi, "a project of the heart," as someone close to him put it, for he passed away in the same year his book was published."
2. Hahn, Reinhard F. (1991). "Poladi, Hassan, The Hazäras. Stockton, California: Mughal Publishing Company, 1989. ISBN 0-929824-00-8, LCCN 88-092511. 431 pp., with 13 illustrations (4 maps, 2 tables, 2 charts, 5 photographs), 5 appendices. Hard cover. US $19.95. Distributed by Avenue Books (840 W. Benjamin Holt Dr., Stockton, CA 95207, U.S.A.)". Central Asiatic Journal. 35 (1–2): 153–156. JSTOR 41927783. Retrieved 2024-01-28 – via Internet Archive.
  The review notes: "This book is remarkable in a number of regards. Most importantly, being a Hazara from Pakistan, enjoying access to Hazara American informants, and having received his tertiary education in his adopted country America, Poladi is in the unique position to relate the subject matter both as an insider and as a Western-trained scholar. He deserves much credit for his sincere and mostly successful endeavor to depict the Hazara’s world in an unbiased fashion, despite his admitted difficulties in detaching himself emotionally at all times, particularly while dealing with his people’s suffering through slavery and war. The exclusive use of the author's own technical and financial resources — aside from other persons' occasional help (e.g. typing, editing, translating, and library access) — makes The Hazäras the rather impressive result of a virtually single-handed effort."
  The review further notes: "The Härzaras has more than its fair share of grammatical and orthographic errors, inconsistencies and inadequacies. Inclusion of page headers would have facilitated quick reference. Captions in the body of the text ought to have been consistent with those in the List of Illustrations. The sporadic appearance of unexplained abbreviations in the bibliography ought to have been avoided. The subject index ought to have been extended to include all section headings. However, none of this lessens the value of Poladi's work to any significant degree. Being an important addition to the hitherto all too meager store of publications about this interesting nation, The Hazäras definitely deserves the attention of those interested in any Central-Asia-related aspect of Afghan studies."
3. JDM (Autumn 1989). "The Häzaras, by Hassan Poladi". The Middle East Journal. 43 (4): 725. JSTOR 4328048.
  The short review notes: "The Häzaras, by Hassan Poladi. Stockton, CA: Mughal Publishing, 1989. xvi + 431 pages. Append. Bibl. Index. $19.95. A detailed study of the Hazara people of Afghanistan. Examines social customs, religion, history, language, and economy. Also includes a chronology and commentaries on rulers from 1370. (JDM)"
There is sufficient coverage in reliable sources to allow The Härzaras to pass Wikipedia:Notability#General notability guideline, which requires "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject".
Cunard (talk) 10:54, 28 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: To discuss sources Cunard identified
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 02:42, 30 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Wordsmith^{Talk to me} 23:23, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Meets WP:NBOOK via the sources found by Cunard. Jfire (talk) 05:35, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Per what user Cunard has provided, more then enough significance in WP:GNG and Wikipedia:Notability (books). Noorullah (talk) 02:59, 9 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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.

Literature proposed deletions

@@ Line 7: / Line 7: @@
 ==Literature==
 <!-- New AFDs should be placed on top of the list, directly below this line -->
+{{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Serfdom in Tibet controversy}}
 {{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Roland Vila}}
 {{Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/The_Admiral's_Caravan}}