Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of kings of Arnor

List of kings of Arnor

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

This list is the very definition of WP:Trivia and WP:Fancruft; I believe it's a remnant from a decade ago when Wikipedia had a lot more fancrufty lists and articles, some of which were even created by a younger me. A lot of that stuff has been excised over the years. Most of these names aren't even actual characters in any of the books. Interested fans can find information like this (and more) at the LOTR wiki; these franchise-specific wikis have few restrictions on content as compared to Wikipedia's stricter guidelines. — TAnthony^Talk 18:09, 5 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 18:16, 5 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 18:17, 5 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Keep The "very definition" of these cookie-cutter nominations is quite false as it appears that the nominator hasn't read WP:Trivia, which doesn't actually provide carte blanche to delete anything which the nominator finds trivial. And WP:Fancruft is an essay which is just more opinion. So, the relevant link for this is WP:ITSCRUFT, which is an argument to avoid at AfD. Our actual deletion policies include WP:ATD; ; WP:CENSOR; WP:NOTPAPER and WP:PRESERVE. These indicate that we should retain these pages. Andrew D. (talk) 18:20, 5 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your comments. There's no such thing as Article for redirect or Article for merge discussions, so here we are, where redirecting or merging are acceptable results of an AfD as opposed to actual deletion. Thanks for listing relevant policies but you forgot about WP:GNG, which, among other things, demands that a topic have significant coverage in reliable sources. There may be plenty of coverage about LOTR itself, but not so much about the anecdotal Elf kings and such we're dealing with here. Preservation is fine but not when a list doesn't meet the basic criteria for notability. Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Family tree of House Targaryen is only one AfD of many I have seen that have eliminated extensive lists and family trees of less-than-notable fictional characters.— TAnthony^Talk 18:52, 5 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete None of these policies are carte blanche to keep anything and everything indefinitely. Unclear how your cookie-cutter links make this censorship. Not being paper does not mean we must reflexively keep WP:EVERYTHING. ATD says to look at improvements or alternatives, none of which you have proposed - instead we could have a merge to the kings articles into an expanded List of Middle-earth characters or a subpage, but this level of detail is quite the fancruft not covered in third-party sources. Reywas92^Talk 19:02, 5 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - The only sources being used here are the Tolkien books themselves, or fansites. I have looked for additional sources to see if there was much talking about the Kings of Arnor as a group that would help establish real world notability, and have found nothing but a couple very brief mentions in Lord of the Rings guidebooks. As there is no sourced content worth merging anywhere, and the article name wouldn't be a particularly useful Redirect, I agree that deletion is the answer here. Rorshacma (talk) 19:17, 5 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Merge with List of Middle-earth characters. Squeeps 10 19:36, 5 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete another list which comes close to being a copy of what is published in a work of fiction.John Pack Lambert (talk) 04:06, 6 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. This content brings together information that the curious can't find in a better format.Individual articles on the listed kings might be excess but not the list.12.144.5.2 (talk) 00:45, 7 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, lists of these kings can be found outside Wikipedia here, here, and here.— TAnthony^Talk 03:24, 7 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

This list is better than those lists (the third link you offered incidentally has no list at all).12.144.5.2 (talk) 04:04, 7 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Feel free to copy everything from here back to the LOTR wiki before this is deleted, as I said they have few restrictions there.— TAnthony^Talk 14:07, 7 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

An absolutely critical correction/clarification I recently added here,was reverted for no good reason there last August when I tried it.(Same at the Tolkien Gateway wiki).12.144.5.2 (talk) 15:43, 7 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete or Merge with List of Middle-earth characters. Some of the characters are notable enough to be apart of a list but an article for this specific list is too WP:FANCRUFT. The merge to suggestion is WP:ATD,though deleting isn't bad due to the fact that Wikipedia is WP:NOT a indiscriminate source of knowledge. Josalm64rc (talk) 20:54, 7 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Merge per previous. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:241:301:8CCF:747C:B4E6:7CB0:7320 (talk) 04:51, 10 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Keep or Merge the article with List of Middle-earth characters.Forest90 (talk) 12:21, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]