Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Summer Club and the Creatures


 * 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. —  Aitias  // discussion 23:53, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

Summer Club and the Creatures

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

Vanity-press book. As I noted on the article on the author James A. Richards that I nommed for deletion, I googled the usabooknews.com award that the book won, and it appears to be mentioned solely in the context of self-published books. Autobiographical and unsourced. Author has created multiple pages about himself, his book, and his company.  Graymornings (talk) 23:37, 1 January 2009 (UTC)


 * 'Delete - 'No other sources; you'd think that a book that has won "prizes" would have more coverage, no? -- ruby. red.  roses  03:30, 2 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete - This novel has won no awards, it isn't important or well known, and it has only been nominated for awards by its author. Considering its author obviously created this entry, this article is nothing more than a vanity piece for an unsuccessful writer.69.140.246.145 (talk) 18:34, 2 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete - Visiting the Lambda page shows that the nominees page is the same as 'books submitted' thereby anything can be nominated. In a deleted segment, he claimed the book wasn't reviewed more because of its poor cover. The publisher claims reviews by X-Factor and the San Francisco Rogue, but I can't locate any references to these publications. The publisher is selling one edition, and Amazon a self-published 'special edition'. Amazon sales rank: 2.6 millionth. Not notable. Self-created vanity page. Delete.


 * Delete - Not really notable. NZ forever (talk) 02:07, 3 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete - Self-published and not at all noteworthy. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.207.234.86 (talk) 10:19, 3 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions.   --  Fabrictramp  |  talk to me  22:59, 3 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete - Can we please just dump this article? The fact that it is on this website is insulting to those of us who don't lie their way through life.  I know in my heart that somewhere, the author of this book (who put the article up originally) is sitting at this very moment in some counter-culture coffee shop in a gentrified part of town telling some poor stranger that he is an author whose work has been covered on Wikipedia. I am willing to bet a large handful of twenty dollar bills that this guy introduces himself to people as an author first, neglecting to mention the fact that his work is entirely self-published and has never earned any recognition worth speaking of.  The longer we allow hacks like this to abuse Wikipedia, the more we legitimize lazily produced art and the shady, lying, halfassed artists who create it.64.32.232.218 (talk) 14:38, 5 January 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.