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 Hainish Cycle. Ad Orientem ( talk) 02:24, 19 August 2019 (UTC) reply

Shing

Shing (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)

(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Poorly cited for 10 years, containing lots of WP:OR. No real world notability. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 12:11, 4 August 2019 (UTC) reply

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 12:11, 4 August 2019 (UTC) reply

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Science fiction-related deletion discussions. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 12:11, 4 August 2019 (UTC) reply

• I boldly redirected this to Hainish Cycle yesterday, and I still believe that to be the correct outcome. There is insufficient material for a standalone article. To the best of my knowledge, I have written more GAs and FAs about Ursula Le Guin's work than any other editor. I am very familiar with the source material. The Shing are characters that are only discussed in the context of a single novel, City of Illusions. Any substantive material about them must be covered there of necessity, because it is integral to the plot. All other other mentions of them amount to the fact that they are a brief part of the history of the Hainish universe; as such, that history needs to be covered at Hainish Cycle anyway. There isn't anything else in the secondary literature, and I don't think there ever will be, because there isn't much more in the primary material. Redirect. Vanamonde ( Talk) 14:43, 4 August 2019 (UTC) reply
• Redirect per Vanamonde93. Since they seem to be more of an expert on Le Guin's work, and I trust their opinion on this matter. Aoba47 ( talk) 17:39, 4 August 2019 (UTC) reply
• Keep - it has useful data. It is not currently included in City of Illusions, and includes the significant later remarks by Le Guin. -- GwydionM ( talk) 07:22, 5 August 2019 (UTC) reply
• Keep - this is a well written article which has been worked on by a significant number of editors for over a decade (i.e. has proven ongoing viability). An average daily viewing level of 18 seems respectable. If the concensus is for deletion then the material should be merged with that of City of Illusions instead of redirection to Hainish Cycle as attempted. The latter article ranges across Le Guin's complex parallel universe, containing only a single sentence on the Shing. Buistr ( talk) 20:17, 5 August 2019 (UTC) reply
• Redirect. Arguments such as it being "useful", "well written", or getting page views are not generally accepted for keeping articles. We need notability from independent reliable sources, which this doesn't appear to have. But page views is a good argument for having a redirect rather than complete deletion. -- RL0919 ( talk) 14:39, 11 August 2019 (UTC) reply

• Redirect per previous arguments, does not appear independently notable. _{ZXCVBNM ( TALK)} 23:17, 13 August 2019 (UTC) reply
• Redirect possibly as a preface to WP:TNT. There seems to be a decent amount of academic discussion of the Shing as they relate to Le Gunn's body of work (See "Shing"+"Le+Guin"&btnG= this GS search)]) which might justify an independent article. However this article has no relation to that possibility and is rather a bunch of in-universe OR best addressed in Hainish Cycle. Jbh ^Talk 19:05, 18 August 2019 (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.