Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/One Day at HorrorLand

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.

One Day at HorrorLand

The result was speedy keep. Nomination withdrawn. (non-admin closure) SL93 (talk) 19:52, 30 January 2022 (UTC) [reply]

[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)

Czar is trying to get this article merged to one or more articles on the article's talk page due to notability concerns. This article passed WP:DYK and WP:GA in 2013 and currently has two FA reviewers that supports its claims to notability. Per WP:BK, the novel has resulted in notable adaptations - including two episodes, a Walt Disney World them park attraction (per talk page), video games, and spin-off book series. For the book itself, the book has coursework available to students per the talk page and the article has a reception section. I'm nominating this here for either a result of keep, merge, or delete to end this. SL93 (talk) 15:49, 30 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. SL93 (talk) 15:49, 30 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Procedural close. AfD is for deletion discussions only and you are not recommending deletion. czar 15:52, 30 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, I am as a possibility and you certainly aren't doing anything rather than pushing your personal opinions. SL93 (talk) 15:55, 30 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

We need consensus since I refuse to do anything per one person's opinion and you have not even attempted to gain consensus. So I'm doing it for you. SL93 (talk) 16:05, 30 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Procedural close No rationale for deletion presented and no one here actually supports outright deleting (or blanking-and-redirecting) the article. If the current talk page discussion does not resolve the issue, the preferred approach for generating a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus would be to propose a merger and list it at Wikipedia:Proposed article mergers. DanCherek (talk) 16:34, 30 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- DanCherek Great, but I hope Czar gets to it so that isn't closed as procedural. SL93 (talk) 16:36, 30 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  As I see it, Czar thinks the article should be merged and you disagree. If neither of you do anything else, the article will continue to exist, the FAC will proceed, etc. If Czar wants to open a proposed merge discussion, they can do so and that will hopefully invite some additional opinions. For that reason I don't think the discussion needs to be held at AfD right here, right now. DanCherek (talk) 16:41, 30 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  - I'm not so sure. Now, prose issues are being mentioned by a FA reviewer who did not mention it before and who, at the moment, has not told me what those issues are. SL93 (talk) 16:44, 30 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    - That is a false statement. In my original comments, I pointed out two areas where the prose needed further work so I did discuss issues with the prose before. You are not accurately representing my review. Aoba47 (talk) 17:13, 30 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
      - I'm sorry for not speaking clearly enough. I meant besides that. SL93 (talk) 17:15, 30 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Withdraw: This can be closed. Although I don't remember how to close it myself. SL93 (talk) 19:31, 30 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Here are the instructions on how to withdraw a AFD as the nominator. Aoba47 (talk) 19:50, 30 January 2022 (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.