Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Deltora Book of Monsters

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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 Deltora_Quest_(series)#Bonus_books. (non-admin closure)Davey2010Talk 00:09, 13 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The Deltora Book of Monsters[edit]

The Deltora Book of Monsters (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Reference book to a marginally notable series, published as part of the series. Might be merged to one of the series articles, but as a standalone title it is not notable. Mikeblas (talk) 12:14, 29 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. North America1000 16:06, 29 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. North America1000 16:06, 29 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. North America1000 16:06, 29 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Maybe redirect to Deltora series as there's simply not much for a better separate article. SwisterTwister talk 06:12, 5 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, —JAaron95 Talk 15:40, 6 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Redirect to Deltora_Quest_(series)#Bonus_books. I can find nothing to show that this companion book is notable enough for its own article. Like many companion pieces for long running series (regardles of popularity), it looks like its release was overlooked by the majority of reliable sources. Tokyogirl79 (。◕‿◕。) 04:38, 7 October 2015 (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.