Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/A Need for Hope

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. Yunshui ^雲 _水 15:07, 11 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

A Need for Hope

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Can find no critical reviews or other reliable media coverage for this book. The article is probably promotional and was created by the author or someone mimicking his name. All that can be found are the typical retail listings. (And while it's not relevant here, the uniformly raving "customer" reviews at Amazon are suspicious too.) ---DOOMSDAYER520 (Talk|Contribs) 14:43, 4 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (Talk|Contribs) 14:43, 4 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. ProQuest is pretty good for book reviews and gives me no hits for this. Haukur (talk) 16:04, 4 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - I searched and found exactly 22 Ghits, of which the Goodreads page was a passing mention and the other 21 were unreliable. Sadly, lots of good YA novels fail to get the attention they deserve, but Wikipedia is not the place to publicize a new book. Bearian (talk) 21:58, 7 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Not Delete. Google has a knowledge panel for the book - usually knowledge panels are reserved for notable subjects. [1] — Preceding unsigned comment added by 138.16.107.242 (talk) 14:03, November 10, 2019 (UTC)

Google hits are not seen as something that can establish notability per this guideline. As far as the knowledge panel goes, this is created by bringing up information about the source. So for example, if there's information about the book in say, places like Goodreads or WorldCat, Google's Knowledge Graph would pull upon those sources to bring up an applicable panel. It's not in itself a sign of notability, just a sign that there are enough links (reliable or not) that give information about the book. If it's listed on many sale sites or places like Goodreads, those will typically be enough to bring up a knowledge panel. ReaderofthePack(formerly Tokyogirl79) (｡◕‿◕｡) 19:47, 10 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

'Delete. I did a search and there's just nothing out there. Unfortunately independently published works typically don't gain coverage in places Wikipedia would consider to be reliable, however there's not really anything that Wikipedia can do about that. My recommendations for indie authors typically revolves around just reaching out to people for reviews - not just media outlets like newspapers but also review blogs. Almost all review blogs will be seen as non-reliable sources, however getting a good word of mouth can lead to gaining coverage in the places that are seen as reliable. ReaderofthePack(formerly Tokyogirl79) (｡◕‿◕｡) 19:41, 10 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.