Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Horrible Histories World

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 merge to Horrible Histories. J04n(talk page) 16:18, 29 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Horrible Histories World

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

A piece of the Horrible Histories franchise that questionably doesn't have independent notability. Coin945 (talk) 05:48, 21 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Science fiction-related deletion discussions. ^{Babymissfortune} 09:21, 21 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. ^{Babymissfortune} 09:21, 21 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Nominator is clearly on a spree, spending little time on each article. Given that we have a section on this in the Horrible Histories article, the worst case scenario should be a merge back there. --Michig (talk) 09:25, 21 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Comment The bad faith claim by Michig is unfortunate, but I forgive them. :D To clarify, the vast majority of these articles were actually created by me early in my history here at Wikipedia. Now I'm reassessing and thinking to myself "hmm... perhaps they actually don't deserve a place here". It's discussion time.--Coin945 (talk) 09:39, 21 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps you could address the question why this should be deleted rather than at least merged and/or redirected to the section on the same topic in the Horrible Histories article? --Michig (talk) 19:27, 21 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I apologize for intruding on this discussion, but speaking to Coin945, I think that you are completing missing Michig's point. Rather than just saying it as a "unfortunate" and saying that you "forgive them" (which I find somewhat condescending), it would have been better to answer the question directly about why you chose to open an AfD rather than either 1) redirect and/or merge the content yourself or 2) open a discussion on merging/redirecting on the article's talk page rather than opening a discussion for deletion. Aoba47 (talk) 01:22, 24 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your reply Aoba47. The Keep vote above doesnt really give any justification for the article being kept. It just accuses me of being on a spree. For that reason I addressed this assertion, which I did by explaining that these articles were created by me. This means that I hav done my due diligence at initial creation and over the years when trying to update them. Only now have I taken a step back and realised it's time to purge the Horrible Histories template, when realistically there are not enough sources to justify their inclusion.--Coin945 (talk) 01:53, 24 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Understandable, and thank you for the response. It is always good to reflect on one's prior experiences on here; I have certainly grown a lot since I first joined here, and looking back at some of my earlier edits/work is a little cringe-inducing lol. Hope you are having a wonderful start to the new-ish year! Aoba47 (talk) 02:02, 24 January 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.