Deletion of Whers

Comment: as this article fails #PLOT as well as all three of Wikipedia's core content polices. There are no reliable sources to verify its content which is filled with opinion about these fictional creatures that is pure original research. This article is basically a |content folk, as it provides no real world commentary, criticism, context or analysis that is not already contained in the article Dragonriders of Pern
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:NOT||WP:CFORK)

Comment: and continue to improve as some editors have done since nomination or at worst redirect with edit history intact per  and  so that a basis is preserved should additional sources become available.  Dori has already demonstrated above that Whers are |verifiable in |published books.  As such, we know it is not a hoax, something just made up, and certainly not libelous, but rather part of a series of many books that have a readership far beyond those commenting in this discussion.  Thus, as our project strives to cover human knowledge and serve our readers rather than ourselves (and clearly http://stats.grok.se/en/200905/Whers some of our readers are interested in coming here for this information), we would be doing a disservice by outright redlinking per
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion (WP:BEFORE||WP:PRESERVE||WP:V||WP:RS)

Comment: Fails .  No reliable sources providing substantive coverage of the article subject, that I was able to find anyway
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG)

Comment: The "topic" Dragonriders of Pern is already well established as notable. This current article is not a content fork, as it is simply additonal informations whose inclusion would overburden the parent article, making it a proper "spinout" per ... which specifically states "''when an article gets long, a section of the article is made into its own article, and the handling of the subject in the main article is condensed to a brief summary. This is completely normal Wikipedia procedure; the new article is sometimes called a "spinout" or "spinoff" of the main article''" '''and more importantly''' "''usually rely on the coverage of the parent topic, and may lack demonstration of real-world coverage through sources dedicated specifically to those elements''" Guideline allows that such spinouts may depend on the parent for their notability. Per guideline, it need not be forced to show it seperately. The spinout passes  and  through correct interpretation of 
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Manual of Style (WP:WAF||WP:V||WP:N||WP:WAF)