- 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 of the debate was keep. No Guru 15:44, 29 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
NN fanfiction, just 97 hits. Rory096(block) 20:48, 23 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep. --Domthedude001 20:57, 23 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Strong Keep - Novel is listed on Amazon, Barnes & Noble, and Powell's, and is part of a breaking story about a fanfic author who has flaunted copyright and trademark concerns and offered a fanfic novel for sale. May have only a few hits now, but they're major links. The story of this book and author could have repercussions for the entire fanfic genre (which I am not a part of, btw). MikeWazowski 20:58, 23 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete 1) books published by vanity presses are generally not notable; 2) no hits in Lexis/Nexis or google news, so not a very important story outside the fanfic community; 3) Lucasfilm has yet to make a public statement...but many expect Wikipedia is not a crystal ball; 4) the book is being withdrawn from sale, so the author has given up rather than forcing a fight. If this turns out to be the start of a massive crackdown on fanfic, it may deserve an article later. Thatcher131 00:03, 24 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
DeleteStrong WP:V/WP:NOR concerns. I cannot find news coverage either. Kotepho 00:04, 24 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Weak keep with the SciFi.com mention. Kotepho 16:44, 25 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, was #35,860 on Amazon yesterday. Today it's moved up to #6,650, which still isn't notable. I would expect something generating "considerable controversy" in the fanfic community to get more than 97-8 hits. Modern fanfic is very web-centric. Morgan Wick 00:10, 24 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]- Comment - Google doesn't show everything right away, especially many LiveJournal, blog, or message board posts. However, if you're looking for some "very web-centric" relevant citations, try Sue Rostoni at Lucasfilm, John Scalzi, Lee Goldberg, a TheForce.Net discussion thread, or a Technorati search. MikeWazowski 04:30, 24 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Weakest of weak keeps. Now mentioned in a column with fairly wide readership in a particular niche. Up to 101 hits and Wazowski's point may hold. Morgan Wick 04:18, 25 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. Fanfiction is non-canon and non-notable under Star Wars guidelines, and the article has failed to make a notability case otherwise. --maru (talk) contribs 04:40, 24 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep. Also mentioned in another niche column with wide readership, this one owned by NBCUniversal. - User:rasd
- Keep. --Haham hanuka 08:57, 25 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep - Google search on "Another Hope" +Jareo now up to 550 hits. Also, mainstream media coverage here. TheRealFennShysa 20:39, 27 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep The article isn't just about a vanity published book, moreso about the attempt to circumvent copyright law and publishing fanfiction... in any event, its the kind of odd story that makes Wikipedia so valuable to me. Although, i have to recomend a re-write as most of the article text seems to have been lifted directly off of blogs commenting on the story. Ignus 05:31, 29 April 2006 (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.