Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Chronology of the Harry Potter series
Just because there is plot-related information on a page, doesn't mean that it should be deleted. In addition, as long as (among other things), there is no synthesis involved, primary sources are indeed acceptable sources, per . While there are those who |may not like it, the information would seem to be "notable", especially if this list page is considered a "spin-out" of the main article. Noting, of course, that there is currently no consensus to delete spin-out articles in this way. (As Man in Black knows, I think. Per the last several polls, and the ongoing debate at WP:NOT concerning WP:NOTPLOT, and WP:Notability (fiction), among other places.) I have only ever seen one argument that goes beyond "IDONTWANTITHERE" concerning "in-universe" information in articles (by User:Hiding - which was, I believe, to be wary of fair use/copyright infringement). So if you have information concerning ''that'', great, let's discuss it. Otherwise, there is simply no reason grounded in policy for why this information should be excluded
— User:Jc37, 01:20, 16 April 2009 (UTC)
Stance: keep
Cited policy: WP:OR||WP:IDONTLIKEIT (Wikipedia:No original research)