Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Elder race
and improve. Huh, what's going on? Two secondary sources have been found which treat this in significant detail, i.e. one page in ''The Encyclopedia of Science Fiction'' and two-and-a-half pages in ''The Greenwood Encyclopedia of Science Fiction and Fantasy''. So it clearly ''does'' meet the requirements of . What's with all the "there are no secondary sources", when there clearly was one already in the article ''at the time of nomination'', and a second one has been found? The fact that the current state is not good is no reason for deletion, as tD|this can be improved, which isn't even difficult, just needs (a lot of) work
— User:Daranios, 15:25, 12 August 2021 (UTC)
Stance: keep
Cited policy: WP:GNG||WP:A (Wikipedia:Notability)