Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Fictioneers

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. Tone 21:46, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Fictioneers[edit]

[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)

Lacks notability. One "capsule review", and that's it. Nothing else in the 13 Google hits[1] (well, 13 issues later the same magazine noted in passing that the range was being discontinued...), obviously nothing in Google Books. No redirect target. Fram (talk) 15:13, 26 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Science fiction and fantasy-related deletion discussions. Fram (talk) 15:13, 26 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Games-related deletion discussions. Fram (talk) 15:13, 26 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. The single review being used as a source appears to be the only real source regarding the set, which is not enough to pass the WP:GNG. Rorshacma (talk) 01:42, 3 March 2020 (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.