Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Demongelic


 * 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 --Malcolmxl5 (talk) 01:36, 9 May 2015 (UTC)

Demongelic

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Apparently self-published book (series is planned, according to author's website, but not verified in reliable sources) by a non-notable author. The article was apparently created by the author of the book, so there are also WP:COI and self-promotion issues. Prod tag removed by a brand-new account. —C.Fred (talk) 23:27, 1 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete A book that might be a series of books is not notable, fails WP:GNG. Joseph2302 (talk) 23:49, 1 May 2015 (UTC)

Should not be deleted. It is a notable book and while it has been four years since release, it has been exhibited at recent large-scale events including Cornwall and Area Pop Event where the book was sold according to the Cornwall and Area Pop Event website, Bradley Pennell is listed. The page has also been updated to reflect that it is only one book that has been released in 2011 and has been updated with the printing information verified by the sources provided. It has also been updated to reflect a neutral viewpoint based on the facts found in the credible sources. —SamanthaBlueButterfly
 * Delete Does not come close to meeting WP:NBOOKS after four years of having been released. § FreeRangeFrog croak 00:12, 2 May 2015 (UTC)

— SamanthaBlueButterfly (talk&#32;• contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * Delete. While the book exists (WP:ITEXISTS), there hasn't been any coverage of the book other than a couple of local newspaper articles. It's far from the amount of in-depth coverage that Wikipedia would require to pass notability guidelines. As far as appearances at events go, that in and of itself won't count towards notability unless there was coverage of the event and/or the book (or author) received an award at these events that would be considered a major enough award to give either partial or total notability. It doesn't help that the CPE is just a local comic book convention. However even if it was a major convention it still wouldn't give notability. Coverage of the event would be what would give notability, but I don't see where there has been any coverage of the book or its author beyond the sourcing currently in the article. I don't mean to sound harsh, just that there isn't anything that would give notability per Wikipedia's guidelines for books, which are pretty strict. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)  03:35, 2 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete - self-promotion article with no reliable sources.  CookieMonster755   (talk)   04:35, 2 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature -related deletion discussions. Dai Pritchard (talk) 07:59, 2 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 21:54, 3 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.