Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Spells in Harry Potter (3rd nomination)
I don't think editors should underestimate the importance of this AfD. The guidelines at  have recently undergone some changes, and I think this debate will influence whether those changes are realistically applicable. The question to answer: should editors be faced with a heavy burden to produce real-world information, when an article's subject is already a significant component to an extremely notable work? I myself have no idea. I think the shift toward real-information is a good one; but on the other hand, we shouldn't wikia|ghettoize articles too hastily. According to the current , an article should be kept if there exists an obvious potential to produce real-world sources for it. It also states that the onus should be on the article's defenders to find these sources. Although little or no real-world content has been produced thus far, I have no doubt it exists. I ask the closing admin to allow the article a stay and to strongly encourage that editors find reliable, real-world content directly related to Spells in Harry Potter within the month, before the inevitable 4th AfD
— User:Ichormosquito, 05:46, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
Stance: keep
Cited policy: WP:FICT||WP:FICT (Wikipedia:Notability)