Deletion of Denton (A Touch of Frost)

Comment: It may help if we try to establish clear criteria for the retention/inclusion of fictional places. Any such place is "made-up" for the sake of a story and has no notability beyond that. Being a stub is not a valid reason for deletion, according to Wiki, and most stubs are probaby "useless". Reasons for deletion need to be better than that. If the reason is lack of |notability, then probably most fictional location articles should be merged. So, maybe this argument is a generic one that belongs elsewhere where the main principle can be discussed and decided by a wider audience
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:NOTE)

Comment: Notable. The article was only an orphan because the nominator removed all incoming links to it. Quite a shady tactic in my opinion, stinks of . Further proof lies in the fact that the nominator didn't even tag the article in relation to this discussion, blatantly trying to get it through on the sly. Yes I should assume good faith, but in this situation with this user, there isn't a fat lot of good faith left. Being a stub is not a valid reason for deletion, perhaps the nominator should read up on the deletion policies before nominating any further articles
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions (WP:IDONTLIKEIT)