Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lamikorda


 * 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. Article's subject is found to not be notable. &mdash; Coffee //  have a cup  //  beans  // 01:25, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

Lamikorda

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

This book appears to fail WP:NBOOK and WP:GNG, as I noted when I proposed it for deletion. It is fairly new and was published by CreateSpace, which appears to be a self-publishing company. I could not find any reviews in reliable sources (Goodreads and Scifi365.net do not appear to be reliable), and the awards do not appear to be notable to confer notability as per NBOOK. Most Google results appear to be listings on book-purchasing websites. Everymorning  talk  19:16, 19 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions.  Everymorning   talk  19:19, 19 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science fiction-related deletion discussions.  Everymorning   talk  19:19, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

SciFi365.net is an independent review site; they do not accept advertising or advance copies, and review independent sci-fi novels on a weekly basis. Desmond Ravenstone (talk) 22:24, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

confirming Scifi365 is a legit reviewing website. also self-publish is outgrowing "traditional" publishing; historically many works of fiction got their start this way, and there is talk on Facebook and conlang sites about this book Sboitano (talk) 16:53, 21 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:59, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
 * Delete No coverage found for this book; maybe it's too soon. A Goodreads review does not provide notability. Neither does a fansite "book of the year" selection. --MelanieN (talk) 23:13, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Missvain (talk) 06:40, 26 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Hergé to Kiitra language, on the grounds that the latter article is more properly referenced and at least there's a linked quotation there. Though I have my own conlang. Parcly   Taxel  19:48, 26 February 2015 (UTC)
 * But is that article a keeper, or should it be a candidate for deletion as well? All of its references are self-referential. It goes into great detail about the structure of the language, but the language is merely a feature of this (so far appearing to be) non-notable book. The book article is also written pretty much in-universe, but at least it has one outside reference (the SciFi365 website). The Kiitra article has none. There is no evidence that the Kiitra language has been taken note of by any outside source. --MelanieN (talk) 21:19, 26 February 2015 (UTC)
 * OK, stance change, delete along with the conlang. I'll save the WordPress blog itself, which is outside Wikipedia. Parcly   Taxel  13:23, 27 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Some more reasons I can think of regarding why Kiitra should be deleted: Kiitra doesn't have any history like Esperanto and (as I see it now) the guides are transcribed from the primary material. There isn't a community around it yet like Na'vi and Quenya and I don't see any external input by fans even on the official blog. So it is a protostar and in the future may be suitable for an article, but not yet. Since Lamikorda relies on this conlang as reference, once the language's article falls down the book burns away into oblivion. Now we press . Parcly   Taxel  13:44, 27 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Based on this discussion I have nominated it for deletion, see Articles for deletion/Kiitra language. --MelanieN (talk) 17:45, 27 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.