Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/One Awesome Girl


 * 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. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 06:04, 9 September 2016 (UTC)

One Awesome Girl

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Non-notable book by non-notable author. A search for ["One Awesome Girl" thevar] gives the following ghits: the article (and two hits at speedydeletion wiki), two at Facebook, and a mirror of Thevar. Peridon (talk) 16:16, 24 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 17:56, 24 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 17:56, 24 August 2016 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Delete. I can find nothing usable to show this book is notable via Google and a look using WP India's search engine doesn't bring up anything at all. On a side note, this is why myself and a few others are pushing for an addition to speedy deletion criteria that would take care of obviously non-notable works like this one, where they're self-published or vanity books with no assertion of notability and the author does not have an article themselves. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)  07:23, 25 August 2016 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 01:42, 1 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete. I too can find no evidence whatsoever that either the book or the author is notable. I removed self-promoting sentences linking in from Atlee (director) and from Gautham Menon. Narky Blert (talk) 16:30, 1 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom and Tokyogirl79. The title is also very unencyclopedic. NgYShung  huh? 11:11, 2 September 2016 (UTC)


 * Delete -- clearly non notable per lack of independent sources. K.e.coffman (talk) 03:43, 8 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete - per above. Neutralitytalk 15:23, 8 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete. Per nom; not notable at all from what is shown; poorly written and no RS independent sources. Kierzek (talk) 20:52, 8 September 2016 (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.