From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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 no consensus. No prejudice against speedy renomination. —⁠ScottyWong⁠— 06:01, 29 July 2021 (UTC) reply

The Case of the Dirty Bird

The Case of the Dirty Bird (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log)
Dunc's Doll (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Culpepper's Cannon (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Dunc Gets Tweaked (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Dunc's Halloween (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Dunc Breaks the Record (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Nominating entire Culpepper series. Fail GNG and NBOOK. None have reviews in RS, or otherwise have in-depth (or any) coverage in RS. Author appears notable, but someone took this to mean all of his books needed articles. ‡ El cid, el campeador talk 17:27, 6 July 2021 (UTC) reply

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. ‡ El cid, el campeador talk 17:27, 6 July 2021 (UTC) reply
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Minnesota-related deletion discussions. ‡ El cid, el campeador talk 17:27, 6 July 2021 (UTC) reply
  • At a minimum, these sub-stubs should all be merged; however I don't see enough coverage for even one article on the series. Not sure if these should redirect to the author or be deleted, so no !vote. User:力 (power~enwiki, π, ν) 17:12, 7 July 2021 (UTC) reply
  • Comment, Paulsen is definitely wikinotable having won the Margaret Edwards Award, and three of his novels being Newbery Medal honor books, but that doesn't mean that all of his 200+(?) books necessarily warrent standalone articles, anyway, have not been able to find many reviews of any of the culpepper adventures series of 30 books, The Case of the Dirty Bird has been reviewed by Publishers Weekly here, and Booklist here, Culpepper's Cannon reviewed by School Library Journal here, so even an article on the series doesnt look promising, if there was a "List of Gary Paulsen works" article "redirects" there might be ok but there isnt. Coolabahapple ( talk) 13:38, 8 July 2021 (UTC) reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ifnord ( talk) 23:49, 14 July 2021 (UTC) reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel ( talk) 01:39, 21 July 2021 (UTC) reply
Comment - The School Library Journal review (mentioned above) covers the Case of the Dirty Bird, Culpepper's Cannon, and Dunc's Doll all together. On the Internet Archive, I found 4 sources about the Culpepper Adventures as a series, each a paragraph long: [1] [2] [3] [4] I also found one very short newspaper article about the series [5] and a passing mention that it was planned to be turned into a tv series (which is either incorrect or didn't seem to have happened). [6] I've seen other mentions of the books, but many aren't substantial (just passing), and/or are just in terms of giving an overview of Gary Paulsen's written works.
I don't think the individual books are independently notable, based on the sources, and I haven't had time to look at all the sources in depth. But with the sources above, I'm leaning more towards the pages being merged into a single series page, Culpepper Adventures (or something similar), with the individual book articles redirected. - Whisperjanes ( talk) 02:58, 28 July 2021 (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.