Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Zagreus (audio drama)

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 keep. JohnCD (talk) 21:29, 3 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Zagreus (audio drama)[edit]

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

Completing AFD for an IP editor who included the following as their rationale in their edit summary (here). On the merits, no opinion. UltraExactZZ ^Said~ Did 20:23, 27 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

There have been no improvements to this article in spite of 4 year old tags; unnotable audio, but PROD removed so deletion discussion is required for consensus. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.173.22.6 (talk • contribs) 17:47, 24 May 2013‎ (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Seems to fail WP:GNG. 069952497a^{Comments and complaints}_{Stuff I've done} 21:44, 27 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science fiction-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:34, 28 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. User:StuartDouglas has also added one WP:RS. I myself would have recently but was unable to at the time. The article does admittedly need some work, and perhaps a little pruning, but it can and will be improved. Ohwrotcod (talk) 05:23, 28 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. I have added sources for 2 books, and 1 magazine so far. Ohwrotcod (talk) 05:48, 28 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comment There needs a lot of work doing, but sources have been added. Need more independent sources, but looks promising. It was a big release so I think it is notable and that notability can be proved Rankersbo (talk) 09:28, 28 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - I think that the addition of links to Starburst, scifionline and DWM prove notablity. Article still needs a major pruning, but otherwise seems fine to me. StuartDouglas (talk) 10:09, 28 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, per Stuart Douglas; reviews establish notability. —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 04:59, 1 June 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.