Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rise Of The Fallen

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 speedy delete. SNOW Alexf^(talk) 05:39, 6 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Rise Of The Fallen[edit]

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

Unsourced story that isn't written in an encyclopedic form. Command and Conquer Expert! ^{speak to me...}_{review me...} 18:57, 5 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy delete A1: fiction writing without a central point. Nothing to check for notability since the text isn't about anything. czar · · 19:33, 5 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I would hesitate to speedy it for lack of context - it clearly gives the context. As to the story - a rather pretentious bit of stuff. Not even Clark Ashton Smith would have written like that, nor would that other master of verbosity for effect, Jack Vance. Anyway, it's not encyclopaedic. Not for the inaccuracies. Maelstroms are whirlpools and don't usually have pits you can rise from, and a fortress of brimstone would be of little use as brimstone is sulphur and not very strong architecturally. It can be strong in smell... No, it is not encyclopaedic through being an original story, and belongs on a Facebook page as it's not long enough to merit a Kindle edition at Amazon. Note to the author - It's not all that bad, actually. Watch your spelling and check things like maelstroms and brimstone before you use them. Tone down the wording, and it could be made into something longer that could have a Kindle edition. A lot longer - you need about 60 to 70 thousand words. Forty at the least. Or 15 to 20 coupled with two more stories of the same length. Not guaranteeing it would sell, but doesn't cost much (if anything). Good practice, anyway. Peridon (talk) 20:57, 5 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as (un)original fiction. There really should be a new speedy category for this sort of thing. Clarityfiend (talk) 22:26, 5 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete and then redirect to Soulfly_discography#Singles. As a story, this is not notable. It's something someone came up with one day. However a search did bring up that Soulfly made a single by this name and there's merit in having this title redirect to their discography. I wish the original author luck, but this is not the right place to promote your work. Given that this is based off of something else, fanfiction.net would probably be a better place to post this and I can guarantee that you'd get a better reception than if you were to post it here. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 03:28, 6 May 2013 (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.