Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lives Of The Wandering (Fictional Book)


 * 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   Speedy delete, non-admin closure. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 22:59, 1 April 2012 (UTC)

Lives Of The Wandering (Fictional Book)

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Seems to fail the general notability guideline; a fictional book mentioned in only one short story. I would have redirected it to the short story's article, but the story doesn't seem to have one. (The same author has since created a page on the story). The article seems to be an example of fancruft and a large portion of it was lifted straight from the short story in which the book is mentioned (the author has since removed that part). A Google Books search for "Lives of the Wandering" "a short break" brings up nothing, as do Google News and Google News archives searches. The judging by the author's username (Sambrooks123456), he has a conflict of interest as the author of the short story (Sam Brooks) in which this book is mentioned. In conclusion, I don't think there's a sufficient case to have an encyclopedia article on this topic. I have also nominated A Short Break (Story) (by the same author with the same conflict of interest) for deletion. My fruitless attempts to find sources:,. actually results in a hit, but it's an irrelevant false positive. Chris the Paleontologist (talk • contribs) 21:51, 1 April 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete The obvious conflict of interest is a problem but more fundamentally, this fails to meet the notability requirements. Pichpich (talk) 22:04, 1 April 2012 (UTC)


 * Speedy delete If those Google searches return nothing at all, then the subjects of this AfD do not exist outside the mind of User:Sambrooks123456. As such, both should be speedily deleted as hoaxes. → Σ  τ  c . 22:07, 1 April 2012 (UTC)
 * They do exist, as can be seen with through this link provided by the author in one of the articles. However, they're utterly non-notable and haven't been discussed anywhere else. Chris the Paleontologist  (talk • contribs) 22:10, 1 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Then if it only exists on Google Docs, it is web content that does not assert significance or importance. Speedy delete as A7. → Σ  τ  c . 22:41, 1 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Tagged as such. Chris the Paleontologist  (talk • contribs) 22:52, 1 April 2012 (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.