Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Getting Free


 * 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   no consensus. &mdash; Coffee //  have a cup  //  beans  // 15:57, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

Getting Free

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

The article cites no WP:RS, only primary sources, and I can find no reviews or discussion in secondary sources. The article, therefore, appears to fail WP:GNG. I don't see that this meets any of the criteria of WP:BKCRIT either - in particular, it has won no major awards and the author is not sufficiently notable to make his works implicitly notable. GoldenRing (talk) 11:47, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete and redirect title to author article. Fails WP:GNG for lack of reliable, independent sources.- MrX 13:47, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep Thirteen other books are on the author's article. What is different about this one? More research needed.--DThomsen8 (talk) 18:51, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
 * If you want to suggest other RS that discuss the book, feel very free. Where do you suggest looking?  Searching news, newspapers, books, scholar and JSTOR for '"getting free" "nigel hinton"' shows up exactly one result - a single mention in The Glasgow Herald which doesn't even amount to a single sentence.  What further research do you suggest?  As for the other other thirteen, well, WP:OTHERSTUFF.  This one happened to cross my path.  GoldenRing (talk) 02:25, 27 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. N ORTH A MERICA 1000 21:00, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. N ORTH A MERICA 1000 21:00, 26 January 2015 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, N ORTH A MERICA 1000 02:37, 3 February 2015 (UTC)

On initial research, I only found 1 that can be used as a source. Seeing the lack of supporting references, I would have to agree that it indeed does not meet the aforementioned criteria.Pmanz2014 || Let's Connect 12:08, 3 February 2015 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, N ORTH A MERICA 1000 12:49, 11 February 2015 (UTC)
 * delete I was unable to find any non-trivial reviews or mentions of the book. Deunanknute (talk) 22:42, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

Keep per the significant coverage in multiple independent reliable sources.   The review notes (from the Google snippet): "Getting Free has many of the remarkable qualities which distinguished Mr Hinton's first novel, Collision Course (OUP, 1976). For one thing, it is compulsive reading. It begins: 'Johanna's hands were trembling as she picked up'..."  The review notes (from the Google snippet): "With insight and understanding Nigel Hinton tells the story of two teenage lovers and their struggle to get free and live their own life. ..." <li> The book notes (from the Google snippet): "Nigel Hinton's Getting Free contains many elements familiar from the traditional adventure srory — pursuit, a spell spent snow-bound in a lonely cottage, a desperate drive in search of help, assorted eccentrics, a hint of the supernatural."</li> </ol>There is sufficient coverage in reliable sources to allow Getting Free to pass Notability, which requires "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject". Cunard (talk) 01:00, 13 February 2015 (UTC)</li></ul>
 * Other sources can be found through this Google Books search. Cunard (talk) 01:00, 13 February 2015 (UTC)


 * weak keep - the Kirkus page is a summary not a review, and I can't tell if the others are in depth/sales/etc. Deunanknute (talk) 01:43, 13 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Here is another source about the subject:<ol><li></li></ol> The abstract says "Reviews the book 'Getting Free,' by Nigel Hinton." Cunard (talk) 00:17, 14 February 2015 (UTC)


 * Keep Technically notable. (SLJ is  a source for notability;   Kirkus was at the time--though it no longer is. BBNews is not.). Of the other novels, most should be merged --the 4 Beaver Towers books are not appropriate for 4 separate article. .  WorldCat shows their library holdings: this is 4th with 154.  DGG ( talk ) 12:35, 18 February 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.