Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Little Darlings (novel)


 * 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. unanimous consensus Minus the nom JForget  00:28, 8 May 2010 (UTC)

Little Darlings (novel)

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

No assertion of notability for the work itself. The author may be a bestselling author but not all works are automatically notable, even by a bestselling author. Frank |  talk  16:51, 30 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Keep: Notable does not mean popular, as you seem to be asserting. — Preceding unsigned comment added by AustinBrister (talk • contribs) 14:44, 30 April 2010
 * That is your inference, not my assertion. My statement is that just because the author is a bestselling author does not mean that the work itself is notable. In addition, there isn't any notability asserted for the work in the article anyway. Some admins would delete that under WP:CSD; I decided to nominate here instead. Frank  |  talk  19:17, 30 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 19:29, 1 May 2010 (UTC)


 * Keep - Have added reviews from The Telegraph, The National, The Independent and The Guardian as sources now. Easily meets WP:NB--Sodabottle (talk) 20:06, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep per sources above. Sadads (talk) 18:07, 4 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep - Sources added by Sodabottle demonstrate significant coverage, per WP:GNG.  Jujutacular  T · C 21:17, 7 May 2010 (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.