Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Darconville's Cat


 * 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. (non-admin closure) DavidLeighEllis (talk) 14:35, 16 May 2015 (UTC)

Darconville's Cat

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Non-notable novel; still an unsourced, unreferenced stub after over four years. Orange Mike &#124;  Talk  22:09, 9 May 2015 (UTC)
 *  Weak Keep - there are sources, including an NYT review and a Christian Science Monitor article, and it's apparently the author's best-known work. I have a free moment, so I'll actually take a shot at working on this and see what happens.  FYI, I generally don't like seeing articles get "saved" at AfD, especially after several years of no work; I must be getting soft in the head. MSJapan (talk) 23:55, 9 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep MSJapan seems to be right, there's enough coverage to meet WP:NBOOK comfortably.     Everymorning   talk  23:59, 9 May 2015 (UTC)
 * I actually cannot access either JSTOR or the full-text NY Review of Books (it's a paywall). Do we have some sort of resource list somewhere so I can find an editor who does have access to one or both of them through the WP subs? MSJapan (talk) 00:26, 10 May 2015 (UTC)
 * have you tried WikiProject Resource Exchange? Also for the past few years a couple of the major paywall services have offered a number of free licenses for Wikipedians. I think they put out the requests for applications in June/July time frame. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom  09:23, 11 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. North America1000 06:18, 10 May 2015 (UTC)


 * keep the CS Monitor review and NY Review of books easily satisfy significant coverage in multiple sources and the half dozen or more passing mentions as the educated doorstop are just frosting (but even so they alone are more than what generally passes to establish notability). -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom  20:46, 10 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep as WP:GNG per recent improvements. VMS Mosaic (talk) 03:05, 11 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:51, 12 May 2015 (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.