Jump to content

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Deception Point

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 redirect to Dan Brown#Bibliography. Equally split between merge or redirect, but there is no mention of content ready to be merged over, so going for redirect here. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 17:04, 15 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Deception Point[edit]

Deception Point (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)

This article has long-standing unaddressed notability, style, and referencing issues. I don't believe the article as it stand fully qualifies for inclusion under notability guidelines for books, and the article as it stands is wholly a plot summary. Topperfalkon (talk) 17:33, 8 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 18:20, 8 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 18:20, 8 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, that redirect sounds reasonable to me.--Topperfalkon (talk) 12:01, 9 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science fiction-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 00:35, 11 November 2017 (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.