Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Pearl Saga

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. The Bushranger _{One ping only} 06:06, 23 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Pearl Saga[edit]

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

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. Cliff Smith 18:31, 14 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Can't find any reliable sources to establish notability per WP:GNG or WP:NBOOKS. —Tom Morris (talk) 13:33, 14 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: I don't quite see why this was afd'd. These novels have been around for some time and more may be added to the series when the author finishes up the Bourne series. Also, this is about the series, not the individual novels.--Auric (talk) 17:36, 14 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Surely, it should be fairly obvious why it was AfDed - there don't seem to be any sources to establish notability. —Tom Morris (talk) 20:20, 14 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science fiction-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 20:40, 14 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. - Presidentman talk · contribs Random Picture of the Day (Talkback) 21:32, 14 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Rather than looking for "The Pearl Saga", searching under the names of the individual books, and adding in "Lustbader" to reduce false positives, shows that each individual book would appear to meet the GNG, and quite plausibly NBOOKS as well (although I didn't examine the sources to render a firm opinion to that level). It's clear that if three articles would be permissible, then one encompassing three notable books is likewise appropriate per GNG. Jclemens (talk) 23:07, 14 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Not credible to argue for lack of notability: this is a series by a popular author and each book is probably independently notable as Jclemens says. There might be a case for merging into the Eric van Lustbader article given the lack of content, but that is another discussion and conversely this page could grow into something more fully realised. Mcewan (talk) 00:24, 15 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Jclemens. Cavarrone (talk) 22:54, 15 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Keep There's a fair bit of coverage, particularly of the first book, and Lustbader has written so many books I'm not sure merging to his article is the best idea. The Ring of Five Dragons[1][2][3][4][5] The Veil of a Thousand Tears[6][7][8][9] Mistress of the Pearl aka The Cage of Nine Banestones[10][11]. -Colapeninsula (talk) 14:56, 16 July 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.