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. There are two opinions at this AfD: delete, or merge. While the deletes have, well-versed reasons for deletion, 2/3 of the people who wanted a merge gave no reason whatsoever. Therefore, the consensus here is to delete. (X! · talk)  · @857  ·  19:34, 29 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Grantville Gazette VIII (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)

Beyond the question of whether this is notable enough on its own, I question whether the massive use of possibly copyrighted text in this way is appropriate. Ricky81682 (talk) 07:20, 22 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. -- Jack Merridew 02:14, 23 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• delete — part of a huge cloud of non-notable franchise-cruft, needing a massive cull. All of these 'Gazette' do seem like an inappropriate regurgitation of fan-fiction, which is a copyright concern. Cheers, Jack Merridew 02:18, 23 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - Vanityporn. Unreferenced and no evidence of notability; chunks of blockquotes and tiny blurbs are fluff. Also suggest bringing to AfD (either adding here or separately) 1632 Editorial Board and The Grantville Gazettes. Possibly also (although substantial cull, merge and redirect might also work) 1632 writers; ditto major cleanup 1632 series. --EEMIV (talk) 03:23, 23 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

  Comment — I hadn't seen the writers page, yet; thanks. Do See Wikipedia:Templates for deletion/Log/2009 July 22 for the mass of inappropriate templates involved here; more today. Cheers, Jack Merridew 04:05, 23 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• merge or redirect to the main article. 76.66.192.64 (talk) 06:32, 23 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - Article does not mention any third party commentary, published in reliable sources, that might be used to assess notability. I would not object to adding the rest of the Grantville articles as well as 1632 Editorial Board to this AfD if anyone wanted to do so, since they all have the same problem. EdJohnston (talk) 21:16, 23 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Merge to main. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 16:52, 24 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Merge this article and the other Grantville Gazettes to the main article: The Grantville Gazettes. Some of the Gazettes have been published works and have some notability. Zombie Hunter Smurf (talk) 20:31, 24 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: It should not be merged completely, most of the quotes should be deleted along with some other content. Zombie Hunter Smurf (talk) 21:21, 24 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.