Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of the Mutacene Chronicles characters

List of the Mutacene Chronicles characters

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

Deletable under WP:LC. The underlying fiction is non-notable. RJ (talk) 11:34, 17 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree, in that the book has a popular underground following, and while it may not be notable to the masses as yet, it could be the next Twilight or Harry Potter series. To consider the first book of a multiple book series as non-notable before it is able to achieve the numerous followers it is capable of is irresponsible to those who already enjoy it. Also, Wikipedia is a source for information on all matters, and this book / list of characters is existent enough to warrant a page, small as it may be. There are many other books here the masses have not heard of, some the masses may never hear of, but their place on Wikipedia is cemented, as should this series be. DekkanRhee (talk) 09:47, 19 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia is not a crystal ball. See WP:BALL. When you say, "To consider the first book of a multiple book series as non-notable before it is able to achieve the numerous followers it is capable of is irresponsible to those who already enjoy it." We cannot and should not predict the future on Wikipedia. Be careful of WP:AD. An article on Wikipedia should not be thought of promoting the series but come naturally as a result of notability. I would like an article on the Mutacene Chronicles itself before a listing all the characters. NOVA: The Seven should be looked at for AfD. What you need most are secondary citations and awards to prove notabilty. From pre-emptory internet searches, I have been unable to find such proof. Providing reputable sources as evidence of notability would help to keep these articles. RJ (talk) 22:57, 19 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia is not a crystal ball? Really? If you are not familiar with something, wikipedia is where you go to look for it. This series (which is still on the first novel) looks to be very good if the initial book is any indication. I know at least a dozen people who have read it in my local area, and found someone online 400 miles away who is familiar with it as well. The book may still be 'underground' but unless you are a part of the comic book fandom that followers of the book belong to, you could not understand the importance of the books. The first book transcends stereotypes and combines the mediums of novel and comic book, unlike graphic novels, in a completely written form. If that isn't notable, I don't know what is. DekkanRhee (talk) 01:24, 21 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 12:46, 17 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 12:46, 17 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]