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. Deleted by User:Alexf per G11. Mark Arsten (talk) 02:44, 6 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The Black Rose Series (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I'm nominating this page, along with two other pages for characters in the same series up for deletion. This is ultimately a non-notable self-published series. I can't see where it has gained any coverage in reliable sources (WP:RS that would show that it passes WP:NBOOK. I wish the author well, but neither the series nor its characters pass notability guidelines and Wikipedia is not the proper place for this. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 08:04, 1 December 2013 (UTC) I am also nominating the following related pages:[reply]

Black Rose/Candice Redfield (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Shadowcat/Isabella Masters (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

• Delete. I originally PRODed this as "Possibly made up. There is an amateur website but also incomplete. No other sources can be found that confirm the existence of such a series. Fails WP:GNG". PROD was removed by the author without addressing the issues. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 08:09, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. I PRODded a couple of these. No independent coverage. —Largo Plazo (talk) 14:01, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. I thought about WP:CSD last night. Now I noticed the author removed other editor's tags. Otherwise as above.--☾Loriendrew☽ ☏(talk) 15:01, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Not worth keeping Ottawakismet (talk) 16:04, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:52, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:52, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. Two of the articles are largely copyvio from the Megan Hultz website. I can find the book at Amazon.com, but I can't find any reliable source coverage. • Gene93k (talk) 18:01, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. What Ottawakismet said.--Tco03displays (talk) 06:02, 4 December 2013 (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.