Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/How to Date Men When You Hate Men


 * 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. WP:SNOW keep per numerous !votes and clearly demonstrated notability. (non-admin closure) ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 15:18, 28 January 2022 (UTC)

How to Date Men When You Hate Men

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

Fails WP:NBOOKS. Minimum two non-trivial coverage are missing which must appear in sources that are independent of the book itself. - Hatchens (talk) 01:36, 28 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. Hatchens (talk) 01:36, 28 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep The Vulture ref is an interview so doesn't count, nor does the New Yorker piece. However, The New Republic and Elite Daily are full book reviews. It was also reviewed by The New York Times, The Booklist, and The Northern Star (Northern Illinois University); I'll look for more reviews tomorrow, as well as add refs for the reviews I found to the article. Meets WP:NBOOK. Schazjmd   (talk)  01:46, 28 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 01:49, 28 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep. Also the Economist, Michigan Daily , and Canada's CBC . Meets NBOOK! Pilaz (talk) 02:20, 28 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep. No further comments as the references brought up by both Pilaz and Schazjmd are reliable for this subject. Pahiy (talk) 02:50, 28 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 05:12, 28 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 05:12, 28 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep per links provided by Pilaz. Surely these would have turned up in a search before nomination for deletion Mujinga (talk) 08:42, 28 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Comment. This is a real world book, not a fictional one, so this is incorrectly listed at the "list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions". Sigh. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 09:05, 28 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep per pilaz's sources. I think there's no need to go to town on whether a WP:BEFORE was done or not - anyone who has been to AFD enough knows that searches can miss things. FOARP (talk) 09:10, 28 January 2022 (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.