Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/1632 Editorial Board

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. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 18:27, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

1632 Editorial Board

Non-notable fan fiction board. Ricky81682 (talk) 17:51, 24 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions. -- the wub "?!" 18:18, 24 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, promotional, no hope of finding sources. Blast Ulna (talk) 19:38, 24 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Comment they're integral to the development of the storyline, and the stories passed by the board are published in real-to-life hardcover books by BAEN... so it's not exactly the run of the mill fanfics. 76.66.192.64 (talk) 09:36, 25 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to 1632 series 76.66.192.64 (talk) 09:36, 25 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep The works are both edited and published by the series creator. Edward321 (talk) 22:44, 25 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Which doesn't have anything to do with notability. Notability isn't inherited. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 23:01, 26 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

delete enwiki has been spammed by a commercial franchise. This is entirely non-notable. Cheers, Jack Merridew 04:14, 27 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete no sources to establish notability per WP:WEB or WP:ORG and may be part of a spam campaign. Nick-D (talk) 10:46, 27 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I am a fan of the series and I never understood the purpose and notability of that article, neither :( --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 16:04, 27 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Merge this and similar articles into 1632 fandom or something like that. NN by itself. Bearian (talk) 18:19, 27 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment: A 1632 Fandom article might not be a bad idea. Apparently the fans have their own mini conventions (Ctrl F 1632). Zombie Hunter Smurf (talk) 18:30, 27 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, part of an elaborate walled garden with little to no notability established by third-party sources. Stifle (talk) 20:32, 27 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - The comments offered at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Grantville Gazette VIII could be thought of as describing this article as well. If the 1632 Editorial Board were notable, reliable sources would have written about it. EdJohnston (talk) 19:46, 29 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, per nom, not notable. Axem Titanium (talk) 15:37, 30 July 2009 (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.