Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Bastard Shagged my wife


 * 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. I'm not sure why this wasn't snow closed earlier  DGG ( talk ) 22:39, 6 March 2012 (UTC)

The Bastard Shagged my wife

 * – ( View AfD View log )
 * ''Note:Moved to The Bastard Shagged My Wife.

Non-notable book, no refs, no reviews from RS, fails WP:NBOOK and WP:GNG, created by same COI account. PRODs removed (to no-one's surprise) by page author, sans explanation. Yunshui 雲&zwj;水 12:27, 28 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete Nothing here worth saving!  Brookie :) { - he's in the building somewhere!}  (Whisper...) 12:37, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

Also nominating

with identical rationale.


 * Delete. Fails notability criteria. There are references to it online, of course, but they fall under "trivial" according to the first criterion in WP:NBOOK. Someone should have a gentle talk with the creator of this slew of articles about books by this author. -Anagogist (talk) 12:37, 28 February 2012 (UTC)
 * The creator of the articles and the author of the books are the same person. Don't think a gentle talk's going to help here... Yunshui 雲&zwj;水 12:55, 28 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete Nothing here worth saving!  Brookie :) { - he's in the building somewhere!}  (Whisper...) 12:38, 28 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete. Couldn't find coverage in independent sources; no evidence that it satisfies WP:NBOOK. NTox · talk 16:45, 28 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete. Not a bad title, but no sign of notability.--Arxiloxos (talk) 17:25, 28 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 00:18, 29 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete the remaining entry in this discussion. After some searches, not finding coverage in reliable sources for this topic. Northamerica1000(talk) 04:26, 29 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete, nonnotable book, self-promotion. NawlinWiki (talk) 04:29, 29 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete - Non-notable article, there aren't any appropriate third-party sources to support this aside from an Amazon link. SwisterTwister   talk  06:13, 29 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete and snow close. This is a pretty blatant self-promotion. I also want to mention that the content on this page is also on User:Molalatladi. Tokyogirl79 (talk) 07:17, 29 February 2012 (UTC)tokyogirl79
 * Delete and snow close as non-notable book. Please note, though, that this AfD has veered away from deletion reasons. Also the second nominated item has been speedied(!?). Rich Farmbrough, 13:40, 29 February 2012 (UTC).


 * Delete - Non-notable article, self-promotion. -- Joaquin008  ( talk ) 13:55, 29 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Db-a7 states Note that books, albums, software etc., or schools, are specifically not allowed under the A7 criterion. (my underlining) -- Trevj (talk) 13:39, 6 March 2012 (UTC)
 * As far as I can see, no-one here has advocated a speedy deletion. What's your point? Yunshui 雲&zwj;水 13:41, 6 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Oh I see, you mean Jimfbleak's deletion of Follies.... Since it was hosted as web content, I'm thinking A7 was an appropriate rationale. Yunshui 雲&zwj;水 13:42, 6 March 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.