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. Courcelles (talk) 02:49, 13 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Velgarth[edit]

Velgarth (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)

A very long article sourced entirely from the content of the books it references. In many cases the wiki-links in the article are themselves recursive. This is WP:OR at its best or worst. There are already articles about the individual books and the author and this is just a (very extended) synthesis derived from the content of those books. Fails WP:GNG  Velella  Velella Talk   14:35, 28 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. MT TrainTalk 03:12, 29 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. MT TrainTalk 03:12, 29 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, J04n(talk page) 16:32, 5 April 2018 (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.