Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Eltas

: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 redirect to The Book of Lost Tales. No evidence of independent notability, but no reason this would be harmful as a search term. History has been left intact for any merging that's desired. ~ mazca ^talk 22:04, 22 March 2010 (UTC)

=[[Eltas]]=

:{{la|Eltas}} – (View AfDView log{{•}} {{plainlink|1=http://toolserver.org/~betacommand/cgi-bin/afdparser?afd={{urlencode:Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Eltas}}|2=AfD statistics}})

:({{findsources|Eltas}})

the article sums it up nicely when it says "Eltas remains overall a mysterious and unexplored minor figure" Ridernyc (talk) 21:22, 14 March 2010 (UTC)

Merge to The Book of Lost Tales. De728631 (talk) 22:02, 14 March 2010 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 00:38, 15 March 2010 (UTC)
Redirect to The Book of Lost Tales. Uthanc (talk) 06:12, 15 March 2010 (UTC)

:Before the nominator says it's not notable enough to ever be a search term, consider that it's Tolkien stuff. Some will inevitably treat Wikipedia like a Tolkien encyclopedia site. I'm not saying we should keep every single scrap of info but there's a place for everything no matter how small. Uthanc (talk) 12:19, 15 March 2010 (UTC)

redirect Every named tolkien character should be included, at least as a redirect, even for the backstory. . There's no possible reason why a redirect would be harmful. it will help some people: yhere is no name in Tokien that people may not look for. . Redirect are an easy compromise in situations like this. DGG ( talk ) 14:37, 16 March 2010 (UTC) .
Redirect. Given that there are no secondary sources, this obscure character can not be given encyclopedic treatment. Abductive (reasoning) 03:58, 22 March 2010 (UTC)

: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.