Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ewald series


 * 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. Secret account 04:25, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

Ewald series

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Non-notable books lacking GHITs and GNEWS of substance. Fails WP:NOTBOOK. red dog six (talk) 14:13, 1 April 2013 (UTC) --Ewaldlover223 (talk) 15:06, 1 April 2013 (UTC) The wikipedia page was accurate and was deleted for terrible reasons. Although it is a not so well known book series, The Ewald Series, had a wikipedia article that was informative with up to date details. There are plenty of online websites, pictures, official FaceBook pages, and other sources that can be used to validate the information on the wikipedia article and add to the content to strengthen the article that was written about the Ewald Series. Also Lulu Publishing is a certified publishing house that has connections with notable isbn agencies and ibookstore, nook. Making it trusted as an actual publishing house.
 * Delete - self-published (lulu.com), no independent references, completely fails WP:Notability (books). JohnCD (talk) 14:55, 1 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:59, 1 April 2013 (UTC)


 * Delete - as above, fails WP:Notability (books); I can't find any coverage in independent sources at all. --bonadea contributions talk 19:28, 1 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete: The SPA notwithstanding, there's no evidence that anyone's heard of this vanity publication, however much the producers are diligent with their self-promotion. Beyond that, the article is a coatrack for the authors.   Ravenswing   04:11, 2 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete. There are plenty of WP:PRIMARY and otherwise unusable sources out there to show that this book series exists, but existing is not notability. (WP:ITEXISTS) We need coverage in reliable sources, which doesn't exist. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)   06:04, 8 April 2013 (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.