Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Stalk

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 no consensus. No consensus to delete but most of the "keep" !voters really didn't give a reason to keep it either. Perhaps the "Threshhold" series this is part of might be notable enough for an article. Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:18, 13 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Stalk

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

Fails WP:BK redirect to Janet Morris reverted hence this AFD. -- RP459 ^Talk/_{Contributions} 00:37, 29 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science fiction-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 00:06, 30 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 00:06, 30 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep. I am having trouble finding more than one mention in Google Books ([1]). Perhaps some web mentions or reviews can be found? --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 17:23, 5 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. I've seen a number of references about this book/series, and will add them to the article within the week. I admit it's not as notable as other books, and it might be reasonable to consolidate the trilogy of which it's a part, into one page. Luke Jaywalker (talk) 00:31, 6 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 03:28, 6 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Weak delete I could not find any references to the book. The other problem is the the article fails to shed any light on its notability making it hard to know anything more about it. If nothing more can be done about it, then it should be deleted. CrossTempleJay talk 09:43, 6 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep but monitor. It definitely needs fleshed out. It looks like fans are putting her stuff up, but not full articles. I messaged a couple that they should construct a better article before posting, to avoid this type of issue.Mzmadmike (talk) 17:54, 6 May 2011 (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.