Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Date, Mate, Rate, Repeat


 * 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. Non-notable book. No ISBN noted, and query on Amazon, etc. proved nothing seicer  &#x007C;  talk  &#x007C;  contribs  00:39, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

Date, Mate, Rate, Repeat

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

Does not meet WP:BK. Unable to locate any substantive mention at all via google. Delete. Horselover Frost (talk) 04:52, 7 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment: The book's cover was uploaded by the original author of the article, who claims to be the owner of the copyright on the image. Horselover Frost (talk) 04:55, 7 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete Fails WP:BK, no reliable sources. Ten Pound Hammer  and his otters • (Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP) 05:03, 7 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete: Non-notable book. Schuym1 (talk) 06:17, 7 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions.   -- the wub  "?!"  11:32, 7 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete No assertion of notability and a quick search indicates nothing to support one. Cheers, CP 21:52, 7 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep Lack of GHITS is not a criteria for non notability. Notability is clearly established and the 5 pillars apply here as well.  The excessive deletionism here is preventing important and notable articles for appearing in Wikipedia. Testmasterflex (talk) 03:52, 9 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment - lack of google hits can be indicative of non-notability. I fail to see how notability is clearly established as the article makes no assertion of notability, the article provides no references, you provide no references, no other editor in this AFD discussion has found any references.  And the whole 5 pillars schtick didn't fly with Le Grand Citrouille so aping this silliness isn't helpful -- Whpq (talk) 20:06, 9 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete. The subject of the article come nowhere close to meeting the requirements set out in WP:BK or the general notability requirements. Nuttah (talk) 19:00, 9 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete - zero reliable sources about the book -- Whpq (talk) 20:06, 9 September 2008 (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.