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. Cirt (talk) 10:15, 15 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Non-notable. Little coverage third-part coverage is given to the book: A Google search for "Transmigration novel J. T. McIntosh" (as another novel has "Transmigration" in it) turns up only bibliographies of the author. The article bears no mention of winning any awards and I can't find evidence of any. There are no reliable sources reporting this book has "made a significant contribution to a notable motion picture, or other art form, or event or political or religious movement" or "is the subject of instruction at multiple grade schools, high schools, universities or post-graduate programs in any particular country". (both coming from WP:NB) Finally, the author is not tremendously significant. This article's author declined a PROD in late November. Mm40 (talk) 22:11, 6 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: I can't find significant coverage for this book. Joe Chill (talk) 00:01, 7 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Merge The author actually is fairly significant as a 1950-1980 novelist, with his most widely held books being mysteries.WorldCat Identities; given that, the article on him should be moved to his real name. This is not one of the more important books, but a little information could be given in the article on the author, besides the mere title. FWIW, it was published by a standard SF publisher, Avon. WorldCat, DGG ( talk ) 00:41, 7 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Merge what's worthwhile to parent article. ChildofMidnight (talk) 02:33, 7 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Deletion is inappropriate because the user Mm40 nominated this article for deletion without first addressing the need for deletion in the Talk page of the article concerned. When he went to the Talk page of the author of the article, he suggested editing was possible, and that would save it from deletion. But that is the wrong page to discuss editing. MM40 should have gone to the Talk page for Transmigration (novel) instead, where he would have seen that the author had suggested a redirect instead of a deletion. I therefore repeat my suggestion that there be a redirect instead of a deletion. Dexter Nextnumber (talk) 06:19, 8 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I'm sorry, I did miss that. But I feel this is a better place to discuss this, as I doubt many people would have seen the discussion on the talk page. Mm40 (talk) 12:57, 8 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, or possibly merge, per DGG. Shadowjams (talk) 07:37, 8 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, agree it should be kept or merged. Zarc9999 (talk) 09:37, 14 January 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.
