Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Eöl

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. No consensus on using a redirect due to some valid concerns, but the consensus to remove the article is clear. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 08:01, 9 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Eöl

[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)

There is no significant secondary coverage of Eöl at a level that justifies having an article on this fictional character John Pack Lambert (talk) 00:28, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. Toughpigs (talk) 00:52, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Science fiction and fantasy-related deletion discussions. Toughpigs (talk) 00:52, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. Toughpigs (talk) 00:52, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Thingol, where he is mentioned. There is only one secondary source given, John D. Rateliff's history of the hobbit, I cannot tell if it gives more than a passing mention of this character but one source is not enough to pass WP:GNG in any case. Devonian Wombat (talk) 06:15, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Mentioned in [1], but a lot of this is plot summary. There's a little bit of discussion of Eol out there, but not enough to fill an entire article. Not sure about a redirect to Thingol, as Eol's only mentioned in a family tree and in a list of kinfolk of Eol without a whole lot of explanation. Not finding a better redirect target, either. Hog Farm (talk) 14:04, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, I think. I am not deeply familiar with Tolkien scholarship, but as the works by J. R. R. Tolkien are the primary source here, shouldn't all the scolarly annotations made by Christopher Tolkien be secondary sources? Anyway, in addition to the other two secondary sources already stated, Eöl gets three quarters of a page in the German Middle-Earth lexicon Handbuch der Weisen von Mittelerde. I would be kind of surprised if this not-so-minor character would not appear in other works of similar nature like The Complete Guide to Middle-earth or The Complete Tolkien Companion but can neither confirm nor disprove myself. Can anyone? Daranios (talk) 19:59, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- Christopher Tolkien is the publisher and editor of the Silmarillion and related works, and is therefore a primary source. Devonian Wombat (talk) 05:41, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- Christopher Tolkien does not count as a secondary source. He is the production editor. In many cases we do not know what of the character comes from which Tolkien.John Pack Lambert (talk) 14:58, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete or redirect - Currently fails to establish notability. TTN (talk) 13:14, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Eöl is an obscure character who has not been meaningfully discussed by journalists or scholars. ―Susmuffin ^Talk 05:46, 6 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. No dedicated entry in Tolkien Encyclopedia, no in-depth analysis found and presented here or in the article. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 06:42, 8 March 2020 (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.