Jump to content

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Anduin

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the current revision of this page, as edited by Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk | contribs) at 15:55, 13 November 2019 (→‎Anduin: Closed as merge (XFDcloser)). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this version.

(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
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 merge to List of Middle-earth rivers. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 15:55, 13 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Anduin (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Yes, Tolkien works have the distinction of being the most studied and written about out of all fantasy fandom. But I don't think a fictional river, even Tolkien's, passes WP:GNG/WP:NFICTION. All sources I see are primary references/description. Because, let's face it, the most you could try to write about it's real world connection is a sentence on two about its name, and I don't even see good sources for this. There is also the so-far unreferenced section in the article about proposal to name a real world object after it, but at best it's WP:ONEEVENT, and at worst, it's WP:TRIVIA. This fact may be used in a sentence about Tolkien's works impact in general, perhaps, but it's hard to argue a fictional river is notable because few fans proposed (and failed) to name a real object after it. (There is also a distinct possibility the discussion about whether real objects in NZ could be renamed after Tolkien's works might itself be notable, but again, WP:NOTINHERITED). Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 12:48, 6 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 12:48, 6 November 2019 (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.