Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/20 Hungry Piggies


 * 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. Kevin (talk) 02:33, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

20 Hungry Piggies

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Delete. Non-notable. -- Alan Liefting (talk) - 08:56, 8 October 2009 (UTC)  Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:12, 15 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete Appears to be a non-notable book by a redlink author. Glass  Cobra  15:36, 14 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.


 * Delete: All that I can find is two brief reviews here and here. Joe Chill (talk) 01:59, 15 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete when the article on a book fails to use the correct grammar for a possessive, all is not well. Josh Parris 03:23, 15 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep Reviews by Publishers Weekly, Kirkus Reviews, and School Library Journal demonstrate to me that this is considered notable. On the "all is not well" rationale for deletion, is that about a missing apostrophe?  I suppose that's beyond fixing.  Mandsford (talk) 15:06, 15 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment - if there are reliable sources reviewing the publication they can be put into the article. This may then lead to the article being kept. In it's current form I would say Delete as it has not been proven to be notable. AirRaidPatrol 84 (talk) 12:24, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

 Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NW ( Talk ) 03:19, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Could you please link to such a source Mandsford, or cite it appropriately? Thanks, NW ( Talk ) 03:20, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.


 * Delete since Mandsford hasn't come forth. No reliable sources. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Many otters • One bat • One hammer) 03:48, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
 * "...since Mandsford hasn't come forth" LOL. Sorry, 10-lb., I was up on Mount Sinai on an important call, and my BlackBerry was out of range.  Without revealing too much, I can say that there will be four new commandments, one of them having to do with government bailouts and executive bonuses.  Mandsford (talk) 13:25, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Seriously, the stuff about reviews is on this link that was already in the article.  No major research was required on my part.  Clickety-click.  Mandsford (talk) 15:14, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Meh. Not enough in my opinion. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Many otters • One bat • One hammer) 17:50, 22 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete No sources, no keep. --Cleave and Smite, Delete and Tear! (talk) 13:47, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete - no assertion of notability. - DustFormsWords (talk) 23:55, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete - unless the sources are added, Lord Spongefrog,  (I am the Czar of all Russias!)  09:58, 24 October 2009 (UTC)
 * 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.