Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Fancyfurever


 * 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 speedily deleted by User:Boing! said Zebedee (under criterion G7), who is watching the page for potential recreation. (Non-admin closure)  " Pepper "  @ 18:57, 5 December 2015 (UTC)

Fancyfurever

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

I see no evidence for the notability of this book - only evidence for its existence, which is not sufficient. It does not appear to satisfy the criteria at WP:NBOOK or WP:GNG. Google searching finds Facebook, Twitter, the book's site, Instagram, but nothing actually about the book in reliable sources. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 14:12, 5 December 2015 (UTC)

Added Canadian ISBN registration number as well as copy right information. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 189.182.0.20 (talk) 15:25, 5 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Please do actually read WP:NBOOK and WP:GNG, and don't waste any more time until you understand them. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 15:27, 5 December 2015 (UTC)


 * Delete as per nomination. I'm a bit curious as to why books can't fall under WP:CSD though. smileguy91talk - contribs 16:47, 5 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Comment. The creator of the article has just requested speedy deletion per WP:G7, which would normally be fine. However, the edit summary was "Please delete page. We will check issues and repost", and I don't think we can bypass this AFD discussion and allow it to simply be recreated - the issue is that the book is not notable, and that's not something that can be changed by "checking issues". I have therefore declined the request, and I think this discussion should continue and decide whether or not this is a notable subject. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 17:10, 5 December 2015 (UTC)
 * They keep re-tagging the article, so I guess the path of least resistance and minimum effort is to just accept the G7 and delete it - and I have done that now. I'll watch the article and will start another AFD if it is recreated with insufficient support for notability. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 18:03, 5 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.