- 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 Keep and rewrite as an article about the Turtledove series of books, rather than as a history of an alternate universe. Thus far, there are many suggestions that the article be revised, but no progress in that direction. If a rewrite is not done within a reasonable time, then this can be revisited as a failure to follow the consensus. Mandsford 12:46, 21 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Timeline-191 (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
A fictional timeline is inherently something that fails WP:NOT#PLOT because it will always be a plot summary and nothing else. The article is also solely sourced to the books themselves, thus having no independent way to WP:verify notability. There may be some third-party sources that have reception about events in the books, but they would belong in the articles about the books, not an excuse to create a WP:CONTENTFORK of the books that recaps the plot. Shooterwalker (talk) 02:54, 4 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. -- Danger (talk) 03:08, 4 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. -- Danger (talk) 03:08, 4 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of History-related deletion discussions. -- Danger (talk) 03:08, 4 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment this is a fictional series article, it is not supposed to be a fictional timeline article, the fictional series itself is called "timeline-191". 65.95.15.144 (talk) 06:24, 4 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Rebuild/rewrite to more properly reflect that this is an article on the novel series, and not just a plotdump. Merge all the book articles here too. 65.95.15.144 (talk) 06:24, 4 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep and rewrite the article to be about the book series as a whole and not merely a plot summary. --Goobergunch|? 18:33, 4 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete - delete as a pure plot article. An article on the series could be created, but completely separate from a complete timeline of the series. Yaksar (let's chat) 01:12, 7 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep and rewrite to reflect the series itself and not be a pure plot dump 74.177.202.165 (talk) 23:34, 9 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:51, 11 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep. This article (and related ones) need work to focus less intently on plot devices and provide more information on the series in general; it badly needs an introductory section and a publication history. Most of the plot detailing should be removed, with the essential aspects committed to the articles on the series' components. Hullaballoo Wolfowitz (talk) 01:23, 11 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment from Nominator my first preference is still for deletion. I don't think a rewrite makes sense here as I'm not sure we'd be talking about the same article or topic anymore. But if it will help to produce a consensus, I'll add my support to a rewrite if it will get this article in line with policy, especially WP:NOT#PLOT, by making it substantially more about the development and reception of the series and not just a plot summary. Shooterwalker (talk) 21:36, 12 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep. This is essentially an article about a notable book series. Needs improvement, not deletion. —Lowellian (reply) 11:25, 16 March 2011 (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.