Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/My Enemy, My Ally

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. Just a plot summary at present - no problem with re-creation if it can be sourced out of universe. ELIMINATORJR 14:07, 25 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

My Enemy, My Ally

Contested prod, WP:NOT a plot summarry, seems like a non-notable Star Trek book as well, Delete Jaranda ^{wat's sup} 14:07, 17 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom, and WP:NOT#PLOT. Nenyedi • ^{(Deeds•Talk)} 14:43, 17 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete As written it is clearly a violation of WP:NOT#PLOT. It also may not be notable under Wikipedia:Notability (books) (I've looked, and can't find any references to it in other media). I hesitate only because there are a lot of Wikipedia pages about Star Trek books (see the many links to them at List of Star Trek novels) and the author appears to be claiming that s/he intends to do more work on the page. However, more than a month has passed since the page was started without the kind of improvments that would be needed. JCO312 16:05, 17 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I have wikified the page, tracked down the release details and added an infobox, and left in place the Novel article template so that the article can be properly completed (although I don't intend doing this myself as I have little interest in the subject!). The plot summary objections are still valid, but maybe now it qualifies for cleanup rather than deletion? EyeSerene^TALK 19:00, 17 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: This novel was originally published in 1984, and subsequently reprinted in 2006 in an omnibus edition, along with others by the same author and featuring the same characters. That alone probably isn't enough to pass the Wikipedia:Notability (books) criterion, but there are probably reviews in reliable sources which could be used for that purpose. (It looks like there was one in Locus magazine, for example; it's not available online, but if someone wanted to go to the library that would do the trick.) Within the context of Star Trek fandom (yeah, I know) the books are somewhat controversial, because they were the first to create a detailed culture for the Romulans (which Duane calls "Rihannsu" — yep, I know we'll see that on AfD by tomorrow); this culture was pretty much ignored by the later television series, but some fans prefer Duane's version of the Romulans to the ones with the shoulder pads from later TV series. I'd be willing to wager that there have been articles in Starlog and the like discussing this book. —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 23:59, 18 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
keep per research by Josiah Rowe. I don't have them available at the moment, but I can verify that this has been discussed in Starlog and other reliable sources. JoshuaZ 21:20, 24 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as per nom.Harlowraman 06:44, 25 August 2007 (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.