Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Warcraft: Dragons of Outland

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. Sandstein 10:25, 1 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Warcraft: Dragons of Outland[edit]

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

The confused use of tense tells me that this was written about a future event, which eventually never happened. Fails WP:GNG. Coin945 (talk) 03:55, 25 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Comment – This series has actually been published. PriceDL (talk) 20:39, 25 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete – Unconvinced it meets WP:BOOKCRIT. Only seems to be mentioned in blog style sources. PriceDL (talk) 20:39, 25 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2017 December 25. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 04:11, 25 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. Happy holidays! ^{Babymissfortune} 11:30, 25 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - not notable. I wouldn't oppose a redirect to Warcraft, which mentions (but does not link) the series, but I don't think one would be useful. Anyone knowledgeable enough to search this term could find the parent page. Argento Surfer (talk) 16:33, 26 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Video games-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 04:52, 30 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Comics and animation-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 04:52, 30 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Non-notable, with essentially no traffic either. Not sure a redirect is worth it, and nothing to really merge. -- ferret (talk) 16:13, 30 December 2017 (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.