- 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 redirect to House of Haldane (fictional). Any useful content may be merged from the page history at editorial discretion, should that page survive its current AfD; if not, the redirect would be simply deleted along with it. T. Canens (talk) 14:48, 30 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
- Cinhil Haldane (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)
Notability is not established. TTN (talk) 22:38, 6 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. TTN (talk) 22:38, 6 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
-
-
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 07:35, 16 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 07:35, 16 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete no indication of notability. None of the Keep arguments address policy--Yellow Diamond Δ Direct Line to the Diamonds 23:45, 21 January 2017 (UTC).[reply]
- Comment (continued from above) We should be looking at the potential for the article, not its current content. To provide some direction for the AfD process, I suggest the nomination should propose how WP:NOTPLOT applies (I think Andrew D is implying similar). 1292simon (talk) 00:00, 22 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
- Regardless of whether it can be better written, it's still not notable.Yellow Diamond Δ Direct Line to the Diamonds 00:05, 22 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
- Merge and redirect to House of Haldane (fictional). I searched "Cinhil" on Google Books and found that, other than references to Kurtz's books themselves, the listed items are either (i) Kurtz talking about her character in interviews or (ii) entries in various encyclopedias of fantasy fiction. In the latter cases, the entries appear to be merely non-substantive re-iteration of in-universe details. In all, I found nothing to suggest that this character has been the subject of substantial third-party coverage (such as has been accorded to, say, Superman or Sherlock Holmes). NewYorkActuary (talk) 19:29, 23 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science fiction-related deletion discussions. Necrothesp (talk) 15:30, 24 January 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.