Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Red Eye of Dawn

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 per socks and other below. Cbrown1023 21:49, 21 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Red Eye of Dawn

Two unreferenced pages about artifacts in books. They do not appear to be notable, and one of the pages appears to be unfinished. I think it is a delete from me, but not worthy of a speedy delete. I may be wrong, either way.

I am also nominating the following related page:

Delete x2. These artefacts may be important in-universe but to the rest of us they are utterly non-notable. The Rambling Man 15:40, 14 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Strong KeepPlease don't delete them! I am certain there is more to come to them, and if there is not, I shall personally make sure that they are detailed and descriptive!!! I shall try my utmost best to improve them all I can, even if its creator does not! I BEG of you, just give me one chance, and I promise they shall look splendid in no time! Please! Uioh 02:23, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - a week later and still no sources... Addhoc 14:37, 21 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Strong KeepPlease do not delete the article. While it does not look too great now, I'm sure the creator has had little opportunity to work on them much, so please, like said above, give him a chance to improve them. 69.122.3.19 01:21, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- I suggest that the closing admin look at the contributions on this IP and Uioh; their editing patterns are similar and Uioh references a post made by this IP on another discussion. Ral315 (talk) 19:47, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Merge both with The Secrets of Droon, which could use expansion. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Hit bull, win steak (talk • contribs) 04:01, 15 January 2007 (UTC).[reply]
Comment:Uioh and 69.122.3.19 share editing trends, typing styles and use similar language. It could be possible that they are the same person. Also, whether or not there is potentially a lot more information to come, if it is more information about the roles of the items in the story, then that will not improve the articles. I can still see no reason as to why these are notable, and niether will any administrator closing this debate, I would imagine. J Milburn 19:42, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. I'd also like to register delete votes for my IP address, my parents, my siblings, and my cat. Chovain^(t|c) 19:56, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Does not establish notability per Wikipedia:Notability (fiction). 'Merge' would not be consistent with WP:NOT#IINFO a plot summary. --maclean 00:36, 19 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Strong KeepPlease reconsider the idea to delete this article. I've always loved these Droon books, and I dunno why anyone wants to delete these articles. So there are sock puppets, WHO CARES? Why isn't Shen Gong Wu deleted then? Moon Medallion looks great, and the Red Eye not as good, but not bad at all. 63.117.244.94 21:57, 20 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comment:We care that there are sock puppets, because it gives the illusion that there are many more supporters of the idea that the user with the sock puppets is proposing. Despite the fact that this is not a vote, the idea that there are numerous supporters of an idea can often sway peoples opinions on the matter, which is not what we are trying to do. Please see Wikipedia:Pokémon test in response to your point about another article getting a page, this on the same subject and, perhaps most relevently, this. Please note that I have not nominated these pages because they are badly written, but because they are about non-notable subjects. J Milburn 22:09, 20 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete unless sourced. Keep arguments invalid. Addhoc 14:37, 21 January 2007 (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.