Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/To Reign in Hell: The Exile of Khan Noonien Singh (2nd nomination)

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was merge to The Eugenics Wars: The Rise and Fall of Khan Noonien Singh. Sandstein 10:01, 28 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

To Reign in Hell: The Exile of Khan Noonien Singh[edit]

[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)

Almost eight years after prior AfD, still no evidence that this novel is considered more notable than other Trek novels (in fact, no sources at all). DonIago (talk) 13:38, 20 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Science fiction and fantasy-related deletion discussions. DonIago (talk) 13:38, 20 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 15:12, 20 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Merge to List of Star Trek novels would seem like the thing to do iff reliable sources cannot be found. I have concerns about doing this on a case-by-case basis, due to apparent lack of sources and clear absence of people interested in improving or maintaining similar Star Trek novel articles. It might be better to hold off and take the time to make a bigger decision about Star Trek novels in general? -- 109.79.78.46 (talk) 21:15, 20 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: The previous discussion suggested a merge with The Eugenics Wars: The Rise and Fall of Khan Noonien Singh. -- 109.79.78.46 (talk) 21:17, 20 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Merge. Either target is fine; The Eugenics Wars: The Rise and Fall of Khan Noonien Singh seems more relevant - assuming it survives instead of being deleted itself. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 11:54, 24 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- "assuming it survives instead of being deleted itself" that is exactly why I think a planned coherent approach needs to be taken to the Star Trek Novels in general. I'm no fan of deleting articles but it would be better to delete with a coherent and consistent plan across the category instead of making piecemeal deletes here and there. The three relatively recent Khan books by Greg Cox seem like they would be more notable than many other Star Trek novel articles, surely there must be reviews from reputable critics somewhere? I can't be sure I'm even looking in the right sorts of places. -- 109.79.81.95 (talk) 21:50, 24 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  Older novels may have reviews that are not well digitized yet... but in the end, the responsibility of securing such sources rests on the creator. If they can't, then such novels don't belong on Wikipedia (but fortunately, they all have entries in Memory Alpha/Beta: [1]). Interest people can improve the fan wiki entries, and if good reviews or such are found, the article can be restored here (undeletion is a thing). _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 03:23, 25 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  At this point I'm not sure if we've established yet that there are no sources, or just that no one is even interested in trying to find them. -- 109.77.210.114 (talk) 20:07, 27 August 2021 (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.