Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/A Clockwork in the Stars


 * 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. – Juliancolton  &#124; Talk 00:08, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

A Clockwork in the Stars

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

Contested prod. Book with no assertion of notability. Only reference is where to buy it on Amazon. Delete.  Blanchardb - Me•MyEars•MyMouth - timed 01:09, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete, speedy if possible as unambiguous self-promotion. --PMDrive1061 (talk) 01:16, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions.  -- TexasAndroid (talk) 01:37, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete Wikiadvertising. Fuzbaby (talk) 01:42, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete Poorly sourced, very little content, self-published work with a lack of sources available to document notability. --Mysidia (talk) 01:44, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete nn, advert. JJL (talk) 02:42, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete lack of apparent notability as defined by WP:N. --Jayron32. talk . contribs  02:57, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete - nn, self-published author … fails WP:BK … pure weapons-grade vanispamcruftisement. Happy Editing! &mdash;  06:11, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete speedily. Self-published, with no documented notability. Thus, it's self-promotion and advertising.--Junius49 (talk) 00:28, 2 July 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.