Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Warrior's Return

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 hbdragon88 (talk) 02:49, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Warrior's Return[edit]

This was previously deleted as an expired prod. It was recreated today and tagged as speedy deletion as little or no context. I'm bringing this here since, A. there is some context here and B. it was once deleted through prod. In my opinion, there is no telling if this book will or will not be notable. There is nothing known about it really except a small plot overview, a conjecture as to who might be in the book, and a possible release date 5 months from now. I say delete now with no prejudice to recreation in the future when notability is gained. Metros (talk) 18:23, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I say keep it because there is some significance as it is the next book in a bestselling series. Shapiros10 (talk) 18:25, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- I see no evidence of that presented through reliable sources in this article. Metros (talk) 18:30, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I got my info from the Warrior's Refuge page and the Warriors (Novel Series) page. Shapiros10 (talk) 18:59, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

- - You do have to click through to the previous books in the series, to learn that it's a manga adaptation (or sorta sequel, it's hard to tell) of a best-selling series of fantasy novels. Though the articles on the series itself are also a little thin on actual sales information, that much can be gleaned without leaving Wikipedia. ——Quasirandom (speak) 18:42, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's a separate arm of a best selling series, so i would still think that counts. Shapiros10 (talk) 19:01, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Per nom, it's a future release, and I don't believe each title in the series is worthy of an article anyway. PKT (talk) 23:32, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I beg to differ. The way these books are selling, every book deserves a page. Shapiros10 (talk) 00:41, 30 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'd say delete for now. If the manga proves itself notable, it can easily be recreated (and there will be sources by then).--Aldux (talk) 15:37, 30 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Non-wiki sources? Because my info was from Wikipedia. Shapiros10 (talk) 17:56, 30 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  - Yes, it has to be non-wiki sources. See this guideline which states that Wikipedia is not a reliable source and information must be found independent of wikis to be reliable. Metros (talk) 18:03, 30 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What if the info on Wikipedia that I used was originally from a non-wiki source? Shapiros10 (talk) 19:20, 30 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Merge to Warriors (novel series). Build it and they will come. Stubs look neglected. SilkTork *^SilkyTalk 18:13, 30 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Corvus coronoides _talk 03:11, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. --Jack Merridew 09:42, 3 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Warriors (novel series), has precious little info currently and I can't see it getting any more until published. cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 11:33, 3 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Doctorfluffy (talk) 15:23, 5 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No!!! Do Not delete this page you melonheads!!!! I've talked to the person who drew the pictures in it!!! (JLBarry) He comfirms this book is Real!!!

~Fp of W&W~ —Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.100.129.13 (talk) 22:44, 19 January 2008 (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.