Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Celtic historical fiction

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. -- Cirt (talk) 14:31, 17 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Celtic historical fiction[edit]

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

This list article duplicates categories under Category:Historical fiction by setting esp. Category:Novels set in sub-Roman Britain and is not notable Sadads (talk) 19:52, 1 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This AfD nomination was incomplete (missing step 3). It is listed now. DumbBOT (talk) 15:24, 3 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 17:30, 4 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Also, google searches of this topic, though it is clearly extent (thus the appropriateness of a category), doesn't return a serious discussion of it as a movement or field thus no article should be present. Sadads (talk) 18:00, 4 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Edith Pargeter has a series set in medieval Wales; Sharon Kay Penman has a series set in medieval Wales; the Outlander is set in 18th century Scotland, Sir Walter Scott has Rob Roy, among others, set in Scotland. This off the top of my head without a search. It's a useful category, and that could be populated without too much work. Truthkeeper88 (talk) 18:20, 4 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Truthkeeper, this is an article not a category.Sadads (talk) 18:22, 4 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Oh well, it seems I've made a good argument for a category. Sorry about that. A little busy these days. Truthkeeper88 (talk) 18:38, 4 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:10, 10 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. What's done here would be better done in a category, as noted above. —C.Fred (talk) 00:14, 10 May 2010 (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.