Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Lost City of Faar

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 keep‎. With any luck the sources presented in this discussion, which were not objected to or determined as unreliable, can be incorporated into the article. Daniel (talk) 22:18, 18 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The Lost City of Faar

[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)

Article has been tagged for over a decade as unsourced - I did a Google search and the subject does not seem to be notable. Chidgk1 (talk) 18:26, 11 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. The 🏎 Corvette 🏍 ZR1^{(The Garage)} 18:54, 11 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Pendragon: Journal of an Adventure Through Time and Space. Kazamzam (talk) 18:57, 11 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Meets WP:NBOOK/GNG
1. Publishers Weekly review [1]
2. Kirkus Reviews magazine review [2]
3. Two reviews by two different authors in School Library Journal (one of text, one of audio) [3][4]

—siro χ o 19:45, 11 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Science fiction and fantasy and Literature. Skynxnex (talk) 20:42, 11 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - The reviews provided above should be sufficient for passing WP:NBOOK. A reception section using the reviews should be added to the article, of course, but they do exist. Rorshacma (talk) 00:49, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comment @Kazamzam: wrote the following on my talk page "Hi, I saw your AfD for the second book in the Pendragon series and proposed a redirect to the main series article. Going through, I think that is the appropriate move for all of the other books as well. I checked all time of them and the best they had as an independent source was the Publisher's Weekly blurb and most didn't even have that. Would you be willing to put up the rest of the series under the umbrella of the AfD for the sake of expediency? Happy to discuss further but to me, none of these cut the mustard. Thanks"

I have no objection to anything you guys decide here so long as I don't have to do anything myself! I am sure your collective wisdom will figure out what is best. Chidgk1 (talk) 06:57, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: Meets WP:NBOOK per sources provided by Siroxo. ARandomName123 (talk)^{Ping me!} 13:35, 15 December 2023 (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.