123:
I'm completing a nomination for an anon who's attempted two separate PRODs. According to the message left at my talk page, "It is hardly a noteworthy book. Rather it is a book that is part of a noteworthy series. This page provides nothing except blatant plot summary and does not benefit
Knowledge
253:
I think deletion and/or a merge is necessary but you continue to delete any nomination for deletion I post. It is hardly a noteworthy book. Rather it is a book that is part of a noteworthy series. This page provides nothing except blatant plot summary and does not benefit
Knowledge at all. Clearly
392:
When I'm feeling rowdy, I usually remove the plot summaries until the articles can be expanded otherwise. I've been dealing with other things rather than the
Princess Diaries as of late, but it's something that can be dealt with via editing - the article is still a functionally acceptable stub.
270:. Professionally published novels are inherently notable per the Novels WikiProject. If we start picking-and-choosing what we consider to be notable works then there are hundreds of other articles that might as well go to AFD, and to decide which ones should go would be a violation of
363:
Knowledge articles on works of fiction should contain real-world context and sourced analysis, offering detail on a work's achievements, impact or historical significance, not solely a summary of that work's plot. A plot summary may be appropriate as an aspect of a larger
124:
at all. Clearly nobody has bothered to improve on it. Instead they create new pages for other books in the series with only one sentence descriptions. If someone needs a summary of every single book in this series, they can go to Google." The edit to the prior debate is
129:
366:
As it stands now, this article is just a plot summary. While that in itself is not a criterion for deletion, the article is in need of some repair before it becomes respectable. How long can it exist in its present state before action should be taken?
140:
as before. One of the most noteworthy series in young adult literature, highlight notable author, parts of the book were used for the second film in the series, it's a bestselling novel, plenty of reviews can be dug up, etc etc etc.
89:
84:
93:
76:
254:
nobody has bothered to improve on it. Instead they create new pages for other books in the series with only one sentence descriptions. If someone needs a summary of every single book in this series, they can go to Google.
72:
64:
116:
402:
387:
345:
333:
306:
294:
278:
258:
241:
232:
220:
206:
178:
164:
150:
58:
80:
378:
175:
17:
341:, obviously notable, no proper reason for AFD, do not use AFD for poor quality articles that desperately needs cleanup.
237:
The following comment was placed on the previous AfD. I have no opinion, just copying moving it to where it belongs
203:
419:
36:
418:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
35:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
398:
146:
394:
255:
142:
189:
229:
291:
216:
Bad faith nom by an anon. If it's been through an AFD last month, there's zero reason to PROD it.
369:
290:... is notable, as is the fact... her series has spawned two major Hollywood releases so far. -
29:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
217:
130:
Knowledge:Articles for deletion/The
Princess Diaries, Volume II: Princess in the Spotlight
302:
notable author, series and therefore book. Proposed deletion and AfD are not cleanup. --
315:
271:
354:
275:
161:
342:
110:
303:
238:
49:
160:
Too soon for another AFD. Possible bad faith forum shopping by nominator. -
287:
286:
Any of the books in the series is notable up through the present, as author
128:. Keep in mind, this was recently kept as a unanimous keep in February at
412:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
314:
very obviously notable book, and part of a very notable series.
73:
The
Princess Diaries Volume II: Princess in the Spotlight
65:
The
Princess Diaries Volume II: Princess in the Spotlight
125:
106:
102:
98:
39:). No further edits should be made to this page.
422:). No further edits should be made to this page.
188:If it's kept, there's no need to go to Google.
8:
174:No valid reason for deletion given. --
7:
24:
228:in light of recent previous AfD.
18:Knowledge:Articles for deletion
176:Richard Arthur Norton (1958- )
1:
439:
403:16:25, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
388:15:34, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
346:15:20, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
334:14:30, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
307:13:57, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
295:13:55, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
279:13:14, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
259:03:59, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
242:05:35, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
233:05:15, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
221:04:55, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
207:04:20, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
179:04:18, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
165:04:16, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
151:04:02, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
59:16:33, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
415:Please do not modify it.
32:Please do not modify it.
136:My personal opinion is
218:Cheers, Lankybugger
373:
401:
371:
149:
430:
417:
397:
386:
383:
374:
331:
328:
325:
322:
199:
196:
193:
145:
114:
96:
55:
34:
438:
437:
433:
432:
431:
429:
428:
427:
426:
420:deletion review
413:
385:
379:
370:
368:
329:
326:
323:
320:
251:Delete or Merge
230:Maxamegalon2000
197:
194:
191:
87:
71:
68:
51:
44:The result was
37:deletion review
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
436:
434:
425:
424:
408:
407:
406:
405:
395:badlydrawnjeff
377:
359:Plot summaries
348:
336:
316:Andrew Lenahan
309:
297:
281:
264:
263:
262:
261:
256:137.238.121.34
245:
244:
235:
223:
210:
209:
204:Message Me....
182:
181:
168:
167:
154:
153:
143:badlydrawnjeff
121:
120:
67:
62:
42:
41:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
435:
423:
421:
416:
410:
409:
404:
400:
396:
391:
390:
389:
384:
382:
375:
372:Cyrus Andiron
365:
360:
356:
355:Knowledge:NOT
352:
349:
347:
344:
340:
337:
335:
332:
317:
313:
310:
308:
305:
301:
298:
296:
293:
289:
285:
282:
280:
277:
273:
269:
266:
265:
260:
257:
252:
249:
248:
247:
246:
243:
240:
236:
234:
231:
227:
224:
222:
219:
215:
212:
211:
208:
205:
201:
200:
187:
184:
183:
180:
177:
173:
170:
169:
166:
163:
159:
156:
155:
152:
148:
144:
139:
135:
134:
133:
131:
127:
118:
112:
108:
104:
100:
95:
91:
86:
82:
78:
74:
70:
69:
66:
63:
61:
60:
57:
54:
47:
40:
38:
33:
27:
26:
19:
414:
411:
380:
362:
358:
350:
338:
319:
311:
299:
283:
267:
250:
225:
213:
190:
185:
171:
157:
137:
122:
52:
45:
43:
31:
28:
353:Taken from
339:Speedy Keep
312:Speedy keep
300:Speedy keep
284:Speedy Keep
268:Speedy keep
226:Speedy Keep
214:Speedy Keep
186:Speedy Keep
172:Speedy Keep
158:Speedy Keep
46:speedy keep
288:Meg Cabot
192:Gardener
276:23skidoo
162:Richfife
117:View log
351:Comment
343:Terence
272:WP:NPOV
90:protect
85:history
364:topic.
304:Canley
239:DMacks
94:delete
292:Denny
111:views
103:watch
99:links
16:<
399:talk
198:Geda
147:talk
138:keep
132:.
126:here
107:logs
81:talk
77:edit
327:bli
195:of
115:– (
50:Max
393:--
367:--
361:.
357::
330:nd
324:ar
321:St
318:-
274:.
202:|
109:|
105:|
101:|
97:|
92:|
88:|
83:|
79:|
56:em
48:.
381:c
376:/
119:)
113:)
75:(
53:S
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.