Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Criticisms of the Inheritance Trilogy

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. - Mailer Diablo 11:42, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Criticisms of the Inheritance Trilogy

Criticisms_of_the_Inheritance_Trilogy (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) - (View log)

• Delete There isn't even enough new info to warrant a new section in the Inhertance trilogy article, let alone a whole new article. All information in this article could be easily fit into the criticism section. Not to mention it's a clear case of a POV fork. Definitely not warranted. There isn't even a seperate article for criticims of the Da Vinci Code, and that would be much more warranted (but still innappropriate.) Brentt 04:39, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
• Delete Really, the article needs to be a lot longer in order to justify being a standalone article; I think Brentt is right when saying all the information could easily fit into the criticism section of the Eragon and Eldest articles. Ultimately, I think the subject lacks the notable sources which would allow us to do this. Until we can find more sources to make an even longer page I don't think the topic merits its own article. UnaLaguna 06:11, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

• This AfD nomination was incomplete. It is listed now. DumbBOT 11:12, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

• Delete All this article does is encourage original research because of the difficulty in finding notable, reliable sources to back the claims up that aren't just one sentence worth of information. I even had to respond to a message the other day where someone suggested we use ignore all rules to "expand" the article with original research. And, of course, it's a POV fork and there is so little information here that it would barely take any room at all on the main article pages. --pIrish 12:49, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
• Delete as above --Astrokey44 13:47, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
• Keep if it can be cleaned up and sourced reliably. Unfortunately, the problem with most Inheritance criticism is that it's from clearly biased sources with no coverage of the flaws in their reasoning. I'm not opposed to the subject of criticism articles, but this one needs to be watched carefully. FrozenPurpleCube 15:53, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
• Delete. Any noteworthy and referenced criticisms should be merged back into the appropriate article(s) (Eragon, Eldest, et al). No reason to push it into its own page - the only reason it's grown "too large" is because people feel the need to include every critic they can dredge up which is patently unecessary. Arkyan • ^(talk) 18:22, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
• Delete This article reaks of original research and the authors own views. Its good for a personal website but not wikipedia --PrincessBrat 19:00, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
• Delete I expressed my concern over the absence of sufficient sources a couple months ago, and in the interim I've seen no evidence that there's any solid basis for an article. The few referenced bits can be placed in their proper context in the "Critical response" sections on the pages for the books and/or the series as a whole. Brendan Moody 19:56, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
• Merge - The appropriate response to this article is to merge its main section back to Inheritance Trilogy. It will probably need editing down to remove the trivial. Peterkingiron 09:14, 23 April 2007 (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.