Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Goblin Trilogy

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

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. Only first book written, so trilogy does not yet exist. Espresso Addict (talk) 04:04, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] The Goblin Trilogy

The Goblin Trilogy (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

not sufficiently notable for its own entry in Wikipedia.

Little to no coverage of the trilogy/these books individually in mainstream press. Author has her own entry.Merkinsmum 15:26, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

Two of the books books also had their own articles so I'm nominating them separately.Merkinsmum 15:52, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
It gets worse. Two out of three books in this spoken-of-on-the-internet 'trilogy' haven't even been written yet, see Demoniac Dance.Merkinsmum 16:20, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete: I first brought it up that the trilogy wasn't notable when the first one wasn't even written. After a year, it still doesn't seem notable, and the notability still doesn't seem to hold up. --Wirbelwindヴィルヴェルヴィント (talk) 02:47, 16 November 2007 (UTC)
  • Clarification - the last part of my argument was that a movie with a prominent actor was being filmed, but it doesn't seem like the film is in production after a year. --Wirbelwindヴィルヴェルヴィント (talk) 22:44, 16 November 2007 (UTC)
Self-confessedly not enough funds to produce it too, and struggling/failing to secure them.Merkinsmum (talk) 00:15, 17 November 2007 (UTC)
No, you brought it up when the first book was written and the film was in discussion. Just to clarrify. The book is widely available from various ares such as WHSmith, Amazon.co.uk, certain libraries and so forth. The author is an establised author with a range of books available and the book has been subject to reviews in online groups and the books have been featured in local medias and has had air time on the BBC albeit with a negative result. ~ ~Alosel~ | (Talk) 21:38, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete: until the book(s) are published more widely and garner reviews by professional critics, ie. in the national press. -- Drunkenmonkey111 (talk) 19:49, 16 November 2007 (UTC)
It will help when two of them are published or written at all.:)Merkinsmum (talk) 00:13, 17 November 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.