Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Literary Rejections On Display


 * 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. (non-admin closure) Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:26, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

Literary Rejections On Display

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

Delete I don't think the one-time sensation of an author posting on it qualifies it as WP:NN -Zeus-uc 17:26, 9 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Keep. I agree that the one-time sensation of an author posting would not make it notable, but a visit to the page and a search suggest that it has been covered for other reasons. The solution is to add this info, not delete the article. At a minimum, merge to Darren Strauss.Tractops (talk) 16:22, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:02, 14 February 2009 (UTC)

Keep this....P&W and The Village Voice are certainly respected secondary sources, I think....I also recall there was an article about LitRej in Writers Digest a while back, but I couldn't find it....Maybe somebody more ambitious than me will try? 7triton7 (talk) 00:42, 14 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep Seems to meet WP:V and WP:N.   Sources seem to check out (quick search).    IMHO, link to the site ought to be added   Vartanza (talk) 03:53, 17 February 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.