Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Shanghalla

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. 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 14:16, 16 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Shanghalla

[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)

I prodded it with the following rationale: "The coverage (references, external links, etc.) does not seem sufficient to justify this article passing Wikipedia:General notability guideline and the more detailed Wikipedia:Notability (fiction) requirement. WP:BEFORE did not reveal any significant coverage on Gnews, Gbooks or Gscholar." It was deprodded by User:Andrew Davidson with no meaningful rationale (despite the fact that I explicitly asked for one in the PROD). So let's see. This is both 100% unreferenced and has zero claims of significance. Frankly, this is a reason why should have speedy deletion category for WP:FANCRUFT, which this is a classic example of - and why some people should be topic banned from deprodding. Anyway, I kindly suggest voting 'speedy delete' on this travesty and moving on, sigh. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 12:24, 9 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 12:24, 9 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Science fiction and fantasy-related deletion discussions. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 12:24, 9 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Comics and animation-related deletion discussions. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 12:24, 9 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete- unsourced fancruft written completely in an in-universe style. The title might be useful as a redirect to some List of Fictional Locations article or other, but the content is hopeless and none of it would be suitable to merge anywhere. Reyk _YO! 14:44, 9 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - The current article is completely unsourced, and is barely about the actual location - most of the content here is just a list of how Legion members died. Searching for additional sources actually turns up very little - its mentioned in plot summaries of Legion stories, but that's it. With no actual discussion or indication of notability in reliable, secondary sources, it fails the WP:GNG. Rorshacma (talk) 16:10, 9 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as per nom. William Harris (talk) 23:24, 9 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom, and fully agree that deprodder was doing his usual thing of holding the entire PROD process hostage to what appears to be petulance. --Elmidae (talk · contribs) 16:30, 10 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Per nom. There is no discernible reason why this would ever be notable enough for a standalone article for all but the newest and most inexperienced Wikipedia editors which suggests a serious WP:CIR issue on the part of Andrew Davidson removing the PROD._{ZXCVBNM (TALK)} 21:56, 14 October 2020 (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.