Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bass Ackwards and Belly Up


 * 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   keep. WP:SNOW  MBisanz  talk 23:04, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

Bass Ackwards and Belly Up

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

non-notable book, lacks 3rd party coverage, fails WP:BK Rtphokie (talk) 18:06, 7 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions.  --  Fabrictramp  |  talk to me  19:09, 7 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Weak Keep there look to be some reviews that can be used to flesh it out. May meet WP:BK StarM  15:25, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Weak keep. Also looks like there's a review in Publishers Weekly, but it's behind a registration wall.-- Fabrictramp |  talk to me  16:12, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Weak Keep - Not enthusiastic because it just barely seems to meet WP:N but with the current references given I can't see recommending its deletion. The article itself really needs a lot of work, it's all plot and poorly-written, but that's not grounds for deletion. --  At am a chat 00:27, 11 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep - With reviews from Booklist, Kirkus Reviews,  Publishers Weekly, School Library Journal and Voice of Youth Advocates in the EBSCO database I looked at the book clearly meets the notability requirements of WP:BK.  The article needs to be expanded but the novel does meet WP:BK.  --Captain-tucker (talk) 19:10, 11 March 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.