Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/House of Elendil

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. – bradv🍁 20:17, 21 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

House of Elendil

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

)

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

Generalogical tree of fictional charcters. WP:PLOT. Fails WP:GNG/WP:NFICTION. Deprodded by User:Necrothesp with no rationale. PS. I downloaded Tolkien Encyclopedia: Scholarship and Critical Assessment and Elendil (or its house) does not have its own entry in it. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 13:20, 14 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 13:20, 14 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the

list of Fantasy-related deletion discussions. Necrothesp (talk) 13:45, 14 November 2019 (UTC)[reply

]

Delete - While the Lord of the Rings is one of the most notable and well known pieces of fiction, that does not automatically mean that every single bit of minutia regarding it is, itself, independently notable. Case in point, this family tree. While some of the specific individual members of the family are notable with plenty of sources, the entire line as a whole really is not. Searching for sources pretty much turns up quotes from the LotR books themselves, or other writings that mention it only because they are quoting passages from the books directly. While the "House of Elendil" is mentioned off hand in a number of sources, the only one I can find that actually talks in depth about it specifically is a top-ten article on Screen Rant, which is completely insufficient to establish notability. I would not be opposed to just having this Redirect to an appropriate target, if one is suggested, as well, but the actual article itself does not need to be preserved in anyway. Rorshacma (talk) 17:04, 14 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Merge or Redirect to
Half-elven. Goustien (talk) 20:31, 15 November 2019 (UTC)[reply
]

Delete: this is not an article; it it is a family tree. This belongs on a fan site, not here.--Jack Upland (talk) 08:43, 17 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete This is the first time that I have seen an article violate both
Half-elven will probably be sent to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion soon. ―Susmuffin ^Talk 19:51, 17 November 2019 (UTC)[reply
]

Delete such raiding of appendices to create articles borders on copyright violations.John Pack Lambert (talk) 00:46, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NNADIGOODLUCK (Talk|Contribs) 13:48, 21 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Comment — Why was this relisted? The consensus to delete is pretty clear.--Jack Upland (talk) 19:22, 21 November 2019 (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.