Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bear: Flight to Liberty


 * 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 soft delete. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. ✗ plicit  13:38, 1 December 2022 (UTC)

Bear: Flight to Liberty

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

Article about a novel, not properly referenced as passing our notability criteria for novels. As usual, every novel is not automatically entitled to have a Wikipedia article just because it exists, and has to pass certain standards of achievement and sourceability to qualify -- but existence is the only notability claim on offer here, the novel was "published" by a print-on-demand house rather than a commercial publisher, and three of the four footnotes here are not reliable or notability-supporting sources at all: two Q&A interviews from user-generated content sites in which the author is talking about himself in the first person, and one blog entry which glances off the book's existence in the process of being about a collection of photographs rather than the book as a book. And while the last footnote, a short review in Kirkus Reviews, is fine, it isn't in and of itself enough if it's the only GNG-worthy source on offer. Nothing here is "inherently" notable enough to exempt this novel from having to have considerably better sourcing than this. Bearcat (talk) 12:35, 24 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. Bearcat (talk) 12:35, 24 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete Nothing found beyond seller sites, no JStor, no GScholar, no newspapers. zip found. It was even hard to determine if this was a work of fiction or non-fiction, based on the scant information online. Not close to GNG. Oaktree b (talk) 16:53, 24 November 2022 (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.