Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cahill branches

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 merge to The 39 Clues. (non-admin closure) mono 05:10, 18 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Cahill branches[edit]

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

unencyclopedic, unreferenced article on fictional characters. Written in an in-universe style which reads like a guide. The subject is worth mentioning but is adequately covered in the main article on the book series, a dedicated article is not warranted. RadioFan (talk) 11:33, 13 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 18:14, 13 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 18:14, 13 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Merge, then redirect with The 39 Clues. ~NERDYSCIENCEDUDE (✉ message • changes) 01:10, 14 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Merge into The 39 Clues with trimmed text, as it was split in the first place in order to try and cut down on article size. Airplaneman ✈ 03:51, 14 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Merge unless size concerns are so big, then rewrite and reference thoroughly. fetchcomms☛ 03:27, 16 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Merge The main article clocks in at ~18KB, and this one at ~6KB. No need for this split. VernoWhitney (talk) 21:03, 16 April 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.