Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Clariel: The Lost Abhorsen
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- 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The result was withdrawn by nom. (NAC). →javért stargaze 17:32, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Clariel: The Lost Abhorsen[edit]
- Clariel: The Lost Abhorsen (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)
Declined PROD. Article about a planned future book. Only source is blog entry from author on Amazon.com, which is not reliable sourcing. Without better sourcing, I believe this falls under "Wikipedia is not a crystal ball." Vicenarian (Said · Done) 16:19, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Redirect to Garth Nix. An author's blog is a generally acceptable source about the author's own activities, but works-in-progress typically fail the GNG if that's the only source regarding them. Author article already contains the essential information. Once it's scheduled for publication and receives independent coverage, an independent article can be reconsidered. Hullaballoo Wolfowitz (talk) 16:48, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Good point, I agree. I will go ahead and boldly redirect. Nomination withdrawn. Vicenarian (Said · Done) 17:02, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Redirect to Garth Nix. An author's blog is a generally acceptable source about the author's own activities, but works-in-progress typically fail the GNG if that's the only source regarding them. Author article already contains the essential information. Once it's scheduled for publication and receives independent coverage, an independent article can be reconsidered. Hullaballoo Wolfowitz (talk) 16:48, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. -- (X! · talk) · @751 · 17:02, 31 July 2009 (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.