Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/And if Strangers Come to Supper

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 speedy delete as G11 (by Jimfbleak) (NAC). SwisterTwister talk 04:59, 26 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

And if Strangers Come to Supper

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

Non-notable self-published novel. Article appears to have been created by the novel's author who appears to be keen to add mentions of his publications to various Wikipedia articles. DAJF (talk) 23:12, 23 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. — JJMC89 (T·E·C) 01:04, 24 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. — JJMC89 (T·E·C) 01:05, 24 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete @Donaldo Rivera: Wikipedia has a looonnnggg page describing the criteria for articles about individual books: Wikipedia:Notability_(books) -- probably more than anyone needs to know, but you can take a look at WP:BKCRIT which is a short list that defines the "bottom line." Bottom line is that this book has a long way to go before meeting any of those criteria. Also, since you are the author of the book in question, you should also look at Wikipedia's conflict of interest policy. It's generally not appropriate to write about yourself or your own products. However, I would bet that there are a lot of articles here that could use some help from someone well-versed in anthropology, so I hope you stick around and join us in making this a better encyclopedia. LaMona (talk) 03:59, 24 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. I never realized that I'd done anything wrong.Donaldo Rivera (talk) 04:21, 24 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete doesn't meet WP:NOTE. It's also spam and a WP:COI violation. -- Gmatsuda (talk) 21:48, 24 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- Shouldn't this article be speeded? -- Gmatsuda (talk) 21:50, 24 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  - Yeah, this qualifies for speedy deletion. I'll put up the appropriate SD one. -- Gmatsuda (talk) 23:03, 24 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Article was speedy deleted. -- Gmatsuda (talk) 06:43, 25 July 2015 (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.