Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ekaterina (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 keep. The Bushranger One ping only 08:20, 20 December 2015 (UTC)

Ekaterina (novel)

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Doesn't meet WP:BKCRIT or WP:NOTPLOT. Strongest argument for keep might be point 5 of WP:BKCRIT, but I don't see a strong enough argument at Donald Harington (writer) that he's "so historically significant that any of the author's written works may be considered notable." &#160; Discant  X  01:46, 11 December 2015 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Keep. Looks like it meets BKCRIT #1 (and GNG) based on reviews: Los Angeles Times, Orlando Sentinel, The Washington Post, and the NY Times. --Hobbes Goodyear (talk) 18:31, 17 December 2015 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Bushranger One ping only 00:37, 18 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep per 's research. I believe as well that Harington is a sufficiently important American writer to qualify under WP:BKCRIT #5, but given the reviews of this book in major publications we don't need to decide that here. --Arxiloxos (talk) 02:00, 18 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:50, 18 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:50, 18 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Arkansas-related deletion discussions. Arxiloxos (talk) 23:20, 18 December 2015 (UTC)


 * Keep and I will see if I can add the sources momentarily. It's worth noting I actually encountered this article not too long ago and also considered nominating it eventually. SwisterTwister   talk  08:24, 19 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep as references cited above and in the article shows it meets WP:GNG and WP:NBOOK ie. two or more non-trivial reviews. Coolabahapple (talk) 15:59, 19 December 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.