Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Darkest Days (the novel)


 * 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. - Mailer Diablo 15:45, 15 October 2006 (UTC)

Darkest Days (the novel)
Article for a fiction novel that has yet to be published. As such, credible third-party sources are not yet available to verify the information here. Article should be deleted and may be resubmitted if and when the novel achieves the required level of notability. notice removed by original author, so comes here for discussion and consensus. Thank you, Satori Son 15:08, 9 October 2006 (UTC)


 * DO NOT DELETE This article is fully verifiable, a simple visit to the publisher's website will confirm the author's legitimacy. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Edwin Roik (talk • contribs) (who had already voted below before posting this)
 * Comment That's the very definition of original research, not allowed on Wikipedia. ColourBurst 20:28, 9 October 2006 (UTC)


 * Delete Article is ad copy, book has been pushed back to next year (withdrawn, vote remains delete). The creator has not contributed anything that doesn't relate to this book or its author, so I expect they are either the author under a pseudonym or a paid publicist.  The creator has already created a category for this author's books.  I'm putting them all to Afd and CfD.  If and when this article is delete, this IP's contributions should be reverted as well: . - Richfife 15:26, 9 October 2006 (UTC)


 * Delete per nom. & previous comment--except to note that publication hasn't been "pushed back". According to the article, the publisher just purchased the rights two months ago, and it typically takes 6 months to a year (if not longer) for a book to go from manuscript to publication. And it sometimes happens that publication rights are purchased but not exercised, so this novel might not ever make it to print. This is a book that doesn't exist--not even, as far as I can tell, as an item on the publisher's list of forthcoming titles. -- ShelfSkewed  [Talk] 18:05, 9 October 2006 (UTC)


 * Delete per nom. johnpseudo 18:16, 9 October 2006 (UTC)


 *  DO NOT DELETE  (duplicate vote) This article is completely verifiable. Pan Macmillan is a major publisher.  The comment herein stating that the novel's release has been delayed is unfounded and false.  I confirmed with the publisher that the release date has not and will not be delayed.  In fact there are indications that he novel's release will in fact be accelerated.  All of the factual information on the author was aquired via an interview with said author and may be confirmed by contacting him directly via the posted website links.  The comments above rely heavily on unfounded opinions and do not constitute valid support for deletion.  The creation of catagories is meant to facilitate finding information useful to those researching this author.  As a new contributor there has not been time to contribute information to other areas.  Wikipedia is an incomplete informational source if it is not including information on all authors published or soon to be published by a major publisher.  This is not a vanity novelist that is self published by a vanity press.  The attacks upon this article sound in personal attacks, by individuals apparently uncomfortable with the subject matter of the novel itself.  Rather than making the effort to research their assertions they have chosen to engage in speculation that disregards the factual support behind the infomation posted.  If their assertions are based in fact then provide the factual support for the claims made.  Deletion of this article on the basis of the arguments made by the other posts in this forum would constitute a viloation of Wikipedia's deletion policy and could perhaps appear to be discriminatory in nature. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Edwin Roik (talk • contribs)
 * Comment Wow, somebody has a vested interest in this article. This has nothing to do with the subject matter, and how the book is published makes no difference. See WP:N, specifically "Wikipedia is an encyclopedia. As such, Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate directory of businesses, websites, persons, etc. "johnpseudo 19:32, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment If you are referring to this link:, it doesn't come close to establishing notability. If and when the book is published and makes a public impact, consider putting the article back.  Until then, wait.  Also, considering the fact that you're talking to a guy that shows anti-Bush documentaries on the sides of walls in bad neighborhoods: , your assumption that I'm disturbed by the content of the book is laughable. - Richfife 19:59, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete When the book is published, we may judge its notability. Even major publisher release books that end up remaindered within a month. When it's published, and has reviews and sales, would be the time for an article. Fan-1967 19:55, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete As per nom and User:Fan-1967 Khukri ( talk  .  contribs ) 22:00, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. Non notable. Appears to be an ad.  Funky Monkey    (talk)   02:10, 10 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per above. Book is not yet published and by an author of little note. Resolute 04:31, 10 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Strong keep, noted author, and it's a non-vanity title from a well-known publishing house. --badlydrawnjeff talk 11:03, 10 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment "Noted author"? Do you have some evidence of notability that nobody else has discovered? If so, please share. The funny thing is, I have some genuine respect for Mr. Gallon--for having the discipline & patience to sit down and write a novel, for finding a publisher, and for not sitting on his behind and waiting for the book to sell itself.  And maybe he'll turn out to be the next Dan Brown, and this entire discussion will become moot.  But right now, he's just another writer with a book coming out, and there are thousands of those every year, and very few of them will rise to the level where they deserve Wikipedic notice.-- ShelfSkewed  [Talk] 14:05, 10 October 2006 (UTC)


 * Delete - No matter who wrote the book (unless the author is really really really popular and thus demonstrably the book is highly anticipated), no matter who publishes it (unless everything they touch turn gold, which doesn't really happen to any publishing house I know in these days of neo-illiteracy =), no matter when it's coming out (unless 99% sure it will come out any day now&trade;), unpublished book means no article, welcome back when the book is actually out and sells by bazillions. --wwwwolf (barks/growls) 23:19, 10 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per the proposed WP:BK. I don't know how badlydrawnjeff can argue that this is a noted author when his first book has yet to be published. Pascal.Tesson 14:15, 12 October 2006 (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.