Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ice Massacre


 * 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. czar ⨹   15:47, 7 December 2014 (UTC)

Ice Massacre

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Does not appear to meet WP:NBOOKS. Furthermore, it's not catalogued by Library and Archives Canada which is a minimum standard for inclusion per WP:BKTS. Tchaliburton (talk) 06:18, 30 November 2014 (UTC) Warner, Tiana, 1988-, author Ice massacre / Tiana Warner. Issued in print, electronic and CD-ROM formats. ISBN 978-0-9880039-3-4 (pbk.).--ISBN 978-0-9880039-4-1 (html).-- ISBN 978-0-9880039-5-8 (pdf).--ISBN 978-0-9880039-6-5 (CD-ROM) I. Title. PS8645.A7655I24 2014 jC813'.6 C2014-905108-5 C2014-905109-3 C2014-905110-7 (Disclosure: article creator) Luftballons00 (talk) 16:32, 30 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep - Incorrect, it is catalogued by Library and Archives Canada. LAC information retrieved from book preview on Amazon:
 * Having an ISBN doesn't mean it's catalogued by LAC. I'm not finding it when I search Library and Archives Canada, even using the ISBNs. Can you provide a link to it at LAC? But even if it is catalogued, that doesn't mean the book is notable. It's a minimum standard. But if it's not catalogued, it absolutely fails notability requirements. Tchaliburton (talk) 17:45, 30 November 2014 (UTC)


 * Delete It's in WorldCat, with only one holding listed . not conceivably notable. Apparently self-published.  DGG ( talk ) 09:47, 30 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete - The book does not meet the threshold standards at WP:BKTS. -  t u coxn \talk 14:49, 1 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Expanding on my earlier argument, the book does not meet the threshold standards at WP:BKTS because it is not catalogued by its country of origin's official national library and self-publication does not correlate with notability (I agree with that this book seems self-published. -  t u coxn \talk 03:31, 2 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. NorthAmerica1000 01:45, 2 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. NorthAmerica1000 01:45, 2 December 2014 (UTC)


 * Delete. I can't find anything to show that this would pass notability guidelines. It has one sole review from Foreword, but they really aren't considered to be a reliable source since they opened their "review for fee" service, Clarion. (If a site is taking payment in any form, even if it's in a specific branch, then their reviews as a whole are generally viewed with suspicion.) This is why the recent reviews from Kirkus are generally not seen as reliable either, although I will occasionally try to use reviews from before they started their RFF arm, Kirkus Indie. (And I'd like to state that part of what makes me so leery of Foreword is that unlike Kirkus, Foreword does not clearly mark their paid reviews as being such, which makes any review from Foreword suspicious. Plus they're notorious for their vanity awards.) In any case, even if we did count this review (which is from Clarion and is thus an unusable paid review) it would still not be enough to assert notability. 07:06, 3 December 2014 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tokyogirl79 (talk • contribs) 07:06, 3 December 2014‎ (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.