Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/L. B. Graham


 * 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. No arguments for keep aside from author JForget  22:30, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

L. B. Graham

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Mass Deletion for all of L. B. Grahm's works. Per first comment here Tim1357--- (talk) 10:24, 20 October 2009 (UTC)









and all subsequent re-directs.

 Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, – Juliancolton  &#124; Talk 13:56, 27 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete all None of the books meet WP:BK and I don't believe the author is notable for anything else. --Pontificalibus (talk) 13:40, 20 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment i discovered this group, what appears to be a WP:Walled garden, thanks for creating this afd for the group. i of course support deletion, but have already "voted" in the first art. Mercurywoodrose (talk) 15:42, 20 October 2009 (UTC)
 * very weak Keep for  the author, redirect the others 5 of the books are in Worldcat, "Beyond the Summerland", the best known,  has 291 WorldCat library holdings. 3 Reviews in all in WorldCat:   .   I consider this marginal. I note that even  the positive review in Christianity Today considers him entirely derivative.     DGG ( talk ) 20:44, 20 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete. Non-notable author and his non-notable books. Doctorfluffy (robe and wizard hat) 05:21, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.

 Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NW ( Talk ) 15:55, 3 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 18:08, 3 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 18:09, 3 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete. Books don't meet WP:NB, and there's no evidence that the author or the publisher meet notability guidelines, either. Dawn Bard (talk) 16:36, 5 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Weak delete. Some evidence of third-party reviews, but not in sufficiently reliable publications to pass WP:BK.  Nearly there, but not quite. Tevildo (talk) 22:53, 8 November 2009 (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.