Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kushiel's Scion

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 of the debate was keep. Babajobu 04:50, 16 February 2006 (UTC)

Kushiel's Scion

(Note: Would User:Endomion who nominated the article please put a delete reason / summary here as is standard for RFA. Thank you Georgewilliamherbert 01:39, 11 February 2006 (UTC))

Whoever deleted my nomination can put it back in, and not delete future ones as is standard for RFA. Thank you. Ruby 01:40, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

(restoring Ruby's reason, deleted by 64.59.208.67 when my comment was also deleted and Francisco's vote was altered.) This is said to be using a crystal ball Ruby 02:43, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

• Um... if you go to Amazon.com and look up the book, no cover art is shown. So nothing is exactly sure yet, so I think the page should stay.

--Francisco Valverde|Francisco Valverde 03:51, 10 February 2006 (UTC) (Note, before being changed by 64.59.208.67, Francisco's comment read: "No sources, the wikilink is not a source for this article. External links, references, etc. needed.")

• Weak keep. This isn't exactly a "crystal ball" article, the book is already available for preorder under that title and the cover art is shown on Jacqueline Carey's website. Crypticfirefly 04:50, 10 February 2006 (UTC) (Restoring my vote which was removed by 64.59.208.67 for no apparent reason when that person also changed Francisco Valverd's vote from "don't keep" to "should stay."Crypticfirefly 07:19, 11 February 2006 (UTC))
• The page should be kept. (unsigned comment by 64.59.208.67)
• Keep notable upcoming books from notable authors in notable series. --badlydrawnjeff (WP:MEME?) 14:21, 10 February 2006 (UTC)
• Delete. Wikipedia is not a crystal ball. I've added back the tag Anon IP deleted and a cleanup as well because if the final decision is keep or no consensus it needs a complete rewrite. Doesn't even qualify as a decent stub right now.--Isotope23 17:09, 10 February 2006 (UTC)
• Delete. Absolutely. Maybe write an article when or if it's actually published. Lulu of the Lotus-Eaters 18:14, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

  Comment, I've added the book cover, ISBN information, and a short synopsis, and I'll be adding some external links shortly. This book isn't an "if," it's simply a "when" with plenty of information available for those willing to hunt it down. --badlydrawnjeff (WP:MEME?) 18:24, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

  Any unpublished book is an "if", not a "when", actually. I suspect this editor has a connection with the book, but planned publications don't always happen as planned. Lulu of the Lotus-Eaters 19:12, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

  Who, me? I hope you weren't referring to me. People with as many successful books as her don't have "ifs." --badlydrawnjeff (WP:MEME?) 21:54, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

• Delete The book is not released yet and the series itself returns less than 300 hits on google thereby making it non-notable--Dinosaurdarrell 19:07, 10 February 2006 (UTC)
  • Uh, If you google "Jacqueline Carey" Kushiel, you get nearly 46k hits. Nearly 38 if you add "-wiki" --badlydrawnjeff (WP:MEME?) 21:54, 10 February 2006 (UTC)
    • Kushiel's Avatar, an earlier book in the series, was a New York Times bestseller. Crypticfirefly 07:40, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
• Strong Keep Series is clearly notable, one of the better sellers / better known fantasy series in recent years, and particularly well known in certain fan subcommunities. A book in publication schedule for 4-5 months from now is almost certainly completely written and edited by now, knowing usual publication scheduling. By the time a date is attached, it's a when other than rare exceptions. Georgewilliamherbert 23:06, 10 February 2006 (UTC)
• Obvious keep. Notable author, high-selling genre series, announced by publisher, listed on author's site, listed at Amazon. "Wikipedia is no a crystal ball" policy refers to speculation; that major publisher (Warner) has announced book meets verifiability standard. Monicasdude 00:58, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
• Obvious keep per BadlydrawnJeff, Monicasdude, Georgewilliamherbert, et al. This close in, this big of an author? This is a sure thing unless civilization ends (or something worse) between now and then (and if it does, we have bigger problems than one article too many on WP)! ++Lar: t/c 02:57, 12 February 2006 (UTC)
• Keep, per Monicasdude. Kappa 09:47, 12 February 2006 (UTC)
• Keep as a very notable book. Why don't the delete votes go try and nominate this article as well? :) Turnstep 13:43, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

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.