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 and redirect to Mayflower (series). Spartaz ^Humbug! 07:17, 3 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Rasputin (Card novel) (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)

Seems to be a classic case of WP:CRYSTAL. I toyed with redirecting to the author article but if it is still a work in progress after all this time, and with so few sources other than the author's own word for it, then that seems equally dodgy. Sitush (talk) 18:34, 26 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 20:33, 26 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Science fiction-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 20:33, 26 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

• Redirect to Mayflower (series), or if that ends up being merged or redirected, to Orson Scott Card bibliography#Mayflower. Card's clearly notable, Mayflower clearly exists, but I have been able to find no RS that indicate Rasputin is likely to be published anytime soon. Kidd's death is not a death sentence to the possibility of this novel's publication... but the nom's fundamentally correct. Jclemens (talk) 00:09, 27 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect to Mayflower (series) as per above. The title is a plausible search term even if the book is never published. power~enwiki (π, ν) 00:24, 27 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• I am happy to redirect in that manner. One of the problems with this process is that there is often an assumption that the nominator prefers deletion. I recall Bishonen hitting that issue big time on one occasion when all they wanted - as I do here - is for a discussion about how best to handle a tricky issue on a low-traffic article . - Sitush (talk) 00:35, 27 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Redirect per above. A bit too much speculation and WP:CRYSTAL to make sense as an article. /Julle (talk) 10:35, 1 April 2018 (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.