Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Emily Windsnap and the Castle in the Mist

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 Emily Windsnap. Mark Arsten (talk) 17:52, 13 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Emily Windsnap and the Castle in the Mist

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

Delete - This article is not notable to be added on Wikipedia. This article appears to be written like an Advertisement or Promotional purpose. CharlesWhiteUSA (talk) 11:12, 3 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to The Tail of Emily Windsnap, although that article also currently lacks independent sources. The Emily Windsnap series, as a whole, appears to have solid notability (see GNews results: [1]) but the individual sequels, not so much. Best result here would be to consolidate one article for the series, and improve that article by adding sources and independent coverage. --Arxiloxos (talk) 14:51, 3 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect per Arxiloxos. Let's avoid the needless elimination of information that could properly be merged and housed elsewhere. bd2412 T 16:17, 3 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:50, 3 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:50, 3 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect. I can see where some schools cover the series in some format, but the series doesn't have any real individual notability. I'll see if I can find sourcing to merit an individual page for the series. If not, then this can redirect back to the author's page. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 04:58, 4 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Changing to specify redirect to Emily Windsnap, as there's now a page for the series as a whole. The individual novels aren't notable enough for their own entry, but there's just enough for the series as a whole to merit an entry. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 05:26, 4 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Merge to Emily Windsnap. One article on the whole series seems quite enough. Peterkingiron (talk) 12:54, 5 September 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.