Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Detroit: A city on the brink


 * 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. The consensus is that there is insufficient independent references to this book to justify an article at this time --  Phantom Steve / talk &#124; contribs \ 08:58, 29 May 2010 (UTC)

Detroit: A city on the brink

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

Non-notable e-book, does not meet WP:BK requirements. Joal Beal (talk) 12:28, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete: I can't find significant coverage for this e-book. Joe Chill (talk) 12:36, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 15:30, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete. Cool Hand Luke 16:17, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep: Notability was established with the ISBN number, links to major retailers for which the book is sold and a high sales ranking on Amazon.com. I have added valid references to this page in the form of Google Books (click link). Per Wikipedia's guidelines, I must note that I am the primary author of this Wikipedia page. Iupolisci (talk) 04:05, 23 May 2010 (UTC)
 * See WP:BK. An ISBN is a necessary, but not sufficient condition for notability, and Amazon.com, etc., are expressly not evidence of notability. Smashwords is a self-publishing service. To establish notability, you need multiple genuine independent sources discussing the work. Currently, the article doesn't have any, and I cannot find any. Cool Hand Luke 15:49, 24 May 2010 (UTC)


 * Comment: The user that initiated this Afd, Joal Beal, has had their account banned. It is questionable why this was even initiated in the first place when this page is barely over a day old.--Iupolisci (talk) 08:39, 23 May 2010 (UTC)
 * I banned the account. There's nothing wrong with this nomination; it's in good faith. Cool Hand Luke 15:42, 24 May 2010 (UTC)
 * DeleteFor a book of such importance, there seem to be no reviews at all. Since it is self-published, that;s hardly surprising.  DGG ( talk ) 17:36, 24 May 2010 (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.