Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Eluréd and Elurín

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. RL0919 (talk) 14:17, 30 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Eluréd and Elurín

[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)

These are not even actual charaters in the Simirillion, in that they do not really do anything in the work, especially nothing to advance the plot. Even if they were, that would not make them clearly notable. What we have here is one primary source and one other source that just reports plot. There is nothing to show notability. Just because their sister is arguably one of two people most key to the victory of good in the Similrillion does not make them notable, all the more so because the Similrillion was never really brotten to the level of a readable, coherent story like LotR. John Pack Lambert (talk) 14:16, 23 December 2019 (UTC) [reply]

Redirect My instinct is to delete this article, but [1] suggests people are apparently reading this, so I guess it's a valid search term. Fails WP:GNG miserably. Only target I can come up with is Dior Eluchíl, and since it says these two were "left to starve in a dark forest", I guess that's a good target. Hog Farm (talk) 15:00, 23 December 2019 (UTC) (changed !vote) Hog Farm (talk) 01:39, 24 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete No good redirect target. Looking at Dior Eluchíl more, I don't think it can pass WP:GNG so I'm changing to delete this article. I suspect the reason the Tolkien articles are in such poor shape compared to the articles about other fantasy series is that contributors focused more on quantity, rather than quality, of articles. Hog Farm (talk) 01:39, 24 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. Lightburst (talk) 15:04, 23 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Science fiction and fantasy-related deletion discussions. Lightburst (talk) 15:05, 23 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Most of the characters in The Silmarillion are not notable. These two are no exception to this rule. Furthermore, their father is also non-notable. ―Susmuffin ^Talk 18:36, 23 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
- I am really considering trying a mass nomination because we have so many articles on non-notable Silmarillion characters. However mass nominations normally fail. It is just odd to me that articles on these totally non-notable fictional characters have been around since January of 2014. That is almost 16 years.John Pack Lambert (talk) 19:42, 23 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I think you mean 2004, Johnpacklambert? Onel5969 ^{TT me} 19:47, 23 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I did mean 2004. Sorry for the typo. The article on their father dates back to December 25, 2002 and has as its lone source the Silmarillion itself. Wikipedia's coverage of fictional people have often been its most unjustified overly much.
Delete - as said above, no real world notability, fails WP:GNG.Onel5969 ^{TT me} 19:47, 23 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Very minor characters indeed. Clarityfiend (talk) 20:20, 23 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom.--Jack Upland (talk) 05:20, 24 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Usual extreme Tolkiencruft. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 07:34, 27 December 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.