Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Electrocities


 * 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. —Tom Morris (talk) 15:38, 5 March 2012 (UTC)

Electrocities

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Being published and having and ISBN does not make it notable. There is a patent by this name, found here but that is not owned by this reputed copyright owner. Fiddle Faddle (talk) 19:18, 26 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete - I dont think that it is enough important to be included in Wikipedia. Yash   t   101  19:23, 26 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete Probably promoting a self-published book (a bit pricey at $19.95 for 126 pages). Peridon (talk) 19:50, 26 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete There's no "probably" about it--author is . HangingCurveSwing for the fence 20:42, 26 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Comment Tesla "wireless energy transfer" used for nefarious purposes? Not sure if the references found so far support WP:N, but it is definitely a book I would read given the opportunity. It currently ranks #4,281,404 in sales at Amazon, which is pretty low, but it has 2 good user reviews there, not that they count for anything. Similarly worded user reviews ("Eric Berkus writes this book using his experience in Casino Management, knowledge of technology and his experience as a pilot") are found at a number of online sites. Edison (talk) 03:38, 27 February 2012 (UTC)
 * If asked for an opinion, I would say that both those reviews come from fairly close to the author. This doesn't only happen with self-published works, either. I never trust fulsome praise in a review. It might sell better if it were a bit cheaper. 126 pages is a slim paperback for $20. Perfumes sell more if priced high, but not books. I don't know how far down Amazon sales rating goes for current works, but that's not the issue anyway. Peridon (talk) 09:38, 27 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 12:58, 28 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete Print on Demand book, see Atlanta Nights and J.K. Rowling and PublishAmerica's unfulfillable promise - far too many articles use books from this 'publisher'. Dougweller (talk) 10:48, 1 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete Current content more appropriate to a dab page. Both topics appear to fail WP:GNG. -- Trevj (talk) 13:43, 5 March 2012 (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.