Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Beatles Real Person Fic

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 of the debate was delete. bainer (talk) 02:56, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Beatles Real Person Fic

This article does not do a good job of establishing notability of the topic, and the sources do not seem verifiable. It has no incoming links other than its classification in WP:Beatles (where User:Kingboyk and I decided that it may be a candidate for removal during the course of classifying articles... shameless plug, if you're a Beatles fan, we'd love to have you! Ahem, commercial announcement over). The article has a lot of jargon (which is not defined) which suggests a very specialised or limited interest audience. (it is true that Google does turn up some references to the term, but enough to be notable? Are they from notable sites? I don't think so but could be convinced otherwise) ++Lar: t/c 01:28, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

• For these reasons, I recommend Delete. ++Lar: t/c 01:26, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per nom. Further info: zero incoming links from mainspace, no non-bot/janitorial edits since creation on 27 February 2006. --kingboyk 01:33, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per WP:WEB, WP:CRUFT, and WP:VAIN. Royboycrashfan 01:35, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
• Delete as Beatlescruft, vanity, nn. --Terence Ong 08:26, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

• I'd prefer to call it "fanfictioncruft" if you don't mind, Mr Ong :) --kingboyk 08:31, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

• Delete, and I'm a beatlemaniac. Agree this is crufty. -- Samir ∙ T C 08:33, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
• Merge if sources can be found. The author PurplePopple has created multiple similar articles in Category:Real Person Fic, including Star Trek Real Person Fic, ActorFic, Star Trek Real Person Fic, Lord of the Rings Real Person Fic. She appears to be an expert on the subject of fan fiction, but unfortunately with a taste for original research. My suggestion would be to delete that which cannot be sourced, and then merge the relevant parts of the whole category as subtopics or mentions into the article Real person fiction. I have contacted the author about this debate taking place, since she could, as an expert on the subject, possibly find sources quickly. It's going to be tedious, but not irrelevant to the topic of real person fiction. ---Marcus- 11:12, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
• Merge, and yes I am another Beatles fan, but one article for Real person fiction is quite sufficient unless the notability is at some future time enhanced by independent reporting and kudos. Darcyj 12:56, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
• Delete'. Complete cruft about some kind of disbute involving LiveJournal users or whatever. If there was a real phenomena, and this article documented that, that would another thing. But not this. Herostratus 19:02, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
• Delete as nn Beatlecruft the.crazy.russian (T) (C) (E) 00:38, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Beatles-related deletions. -- kingboyk 02:26, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

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.