Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Slaves of Socorro

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 redirect to Brotherband. This close only pertains to Slaves of Socorro, because none of the other articles were tagged with the {{Afd}} template. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 23:55, 28 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Slaves of Socorro[edit]

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

Not notable book, appears to fail WP:BOOK and WP:NOTPLOT being an unsourced, summary-only article. Could not find secondary sources to support. -- Whats new?^(talk) 12:30, 21 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Brotherband. Also redirect the other books in this series as lacking individual coverage in reliable sources:

Υπογράφω (talk) 18:45, 21 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect All to Brotherband, although that is not a particularly impressive article either. John Flanagan (author) might be a better target. Lankiveil ^{(speak to me)} 10:59, 22 January 2017 (UTC).[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. Grahame (talk) 23:42, 22 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 00:46, 23 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect and merge up all to Brotherhood. Does not seem notable in its own right. Aoziwe (talk) 10:40, 23 January 2017 (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.