Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Waking Rose
- 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. Courcelles 05:45, 16 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Waking Rose (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log • AfD statistics)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
I think this novel fails WP:NB. The book appears to have been published by the author's own publishing company. More importantly, there are some reviews, but the only ones I can find are on blogs and other non-RS websites. There are zero hits for this book's title in the Google News archive. The prod I had placed on this article was removed with the removing editor claiming that the reviews then linked to on the author's website from the EL section of an earlier version of the article meets NB prong 1. Based on these reviews on the author's website and what I have found, coverage of this book does not come close to meeting WP:NB #1 or any other prong or notability guideline. Novaseminary (talk) 13:49, 9 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete self-published book, fails WP:NB. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 14:52, 9 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete non-notable Dreamspy (talk) 18:53, 9 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. Not a notable novel. Drmies (talk) 03:21, 10 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 02:23, 11 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. Author fails WP:AUTH, book fails WP:NBOOK, no WP:RS to be found (zero nontrivial hits on Google Scholar, Google Books, Google News Archives). — Chromancer talk/cont 02:43, 11 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete per Chomancer, Sadads (talk) 03:37, 11 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment Does the book get any credit for being a self-published best seller per Lulu. Just asking? VASterling (talk) 17:53, 14 September 2010 (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.