Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Green Storm

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. JohnCD (talk) 18:11, 13 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Green Storm[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Plot element from a series of novels, not independently notable (WP:GNG) for lack of substantial third party coverage. Not appropriate for a merger, as it consists only of excessive plot summary (WP:WAF). Sandstein 19:49, 27 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:17, 28 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:18, 28 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science fiction-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:34, 28 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Armbrust, B.Ed. ^{Let's talk}_{about my edits?} 14:47, 3 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. I did a search and there weren't any articles that came up that showed that this group was independently notable outside of the series. I've said it before, but this is precisely the type of thing that only belongs in fan wikis. There's no independent notability to this. I can't really see making this a redirect either- there's no reason for it and the term is fairly loose. I agree that there's nothing that could be easily merged into the article for the series. It's just excessive plot summary, like you said.Tokyogirl79 (talk) 06:05, 4 February 2012 (UTC)tokyogirl79[reply]
Delete nothing to WP:verify notability of this topic, making it impossible to improve in accordance with our guidelines. Shooterwalker (talk) 18:24, 4 February 2012 (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.