Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Red King (novel)

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 merge to Victor Kelleher. Seems a reasonable solution. DGG ( talk ) 23:51, 24 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Red King (novel)

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

May not meet Wikipedia:Notability (books). Currently just an unreferenced plot summary. RJFJR (talk) 15:28, 8 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. — • Gene93k (talk) 15:29, 8 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. Possible copyvio from Spiritus-Temporis.com though it's hard to established who copied whom.
The article's main claim to notability is The Red King was shortlisted for the 1990 Australian Children's Book of the Year Award and was at one point runner up in the 1990 South Australian Festival Awards for Literature, but I've been unable to find reference of this. However, these nominations do count for something. Puchiko (Talk-email) 16:35, 8 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment: Wikipedia:Notability (books) talks about winning an award, it says nothing about being nominated, which at least for extremely prestigious awards might need to be expanded. RJFJR (talk) 15:22, 9 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Keep (unless unfixable copyvio is established). Also nominated for a well-known/significant genre award [1] and reviewed in significant publications [2] [3]. Presumably much more in offline print sources. Cited in reference works, too. [4] [5] Hullaballoo Wolfowitz (talk) 22:28, 8 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

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

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:00, 15 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Merge to Victor Kelleher, at least for the moment. Kelleher clearly meets AUTHOR, so the question is whether the book merits a separate article - the article as it currently stands doesn't demonstrate this, so can it be improved? Quite likely - in my experience, books nominated for multiple similar awards to the ones mentioned often meet criterion 1 of NBOOKS. But they are not certain to do so and, in this case, it is still not clear whether this book does or not. Of the reviews located by Hullaballoo Wolfowitz, the GBooks snippet for the first one, from Kirkus Reviews, suggests something substantial enough to count towards notability, but I'm less convinced by the snippet for the other review. Of the two reference work citations, the second, from The Encyclopedia of Fantasy, is one short sentence in the article on the author and the first, I suspect, is no more substantial. We do need to find further reliable sources which, as Hullaballoo Wolfowitz says, quite likely (though not certainly) exist but are probably offline. As I see it, the best interim solution is probably to incorporate the award nominations into the author's article, and leave this article as a redirect to it until someone has done the search for sources. PWilkinson (talk) 22:08, 20 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

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

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, BusterD (talk) 08:07, 22 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Merge to Victor Kelleher. The book itself doesn't really have enough notability to warrant an article. Tokyogirl79 (talk) 18:37, 22 August 2011 (UTC)tokyogirl79[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.