Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Peeled and Quartered


 * 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. North America1000 02:47, 29 June 2018 (UTC)

Peeled and Quartered

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Non-notable book by red link author. The only source is a dead link. SL93 (talk) 09:22, 8 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions.  MT Train Talk 17:09, 8 June 2018 (UTC)


 * Delete, does not meet WP:GNG or WP:NBOOK, a gsearch brings up nil reviews, WorldCat shows nil library holdings, theres even nothing on the publisher, originally created by a spa. Coolabahapple (talk) 07:30, 9 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Science fiction-related deletion discussions. North America1000 13:16, 9 June 2018 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Yunshui 雲 水 09:03, 15 June 2018 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Yunshui 雲 水 13:22, 22 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete No review or significant coverage found, fails WP:NBOOK. Hzh (talk) 15:29, 22 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete Resorts to namedropping James and the Giant Peach and A Clockwork Orange in a failed attempt to appear notable. sixty nine   • whaddya want? •  17:01, 22 June 2018 (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.