Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Day of the Pelican


 * 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 keep. (non-admin closure) Kraxler (talk) 00:30, 11 June 2015 (UTC)

The Day of the Pelican

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Non-notable book, fails WP:GNG and WP:NBOOK. Joseph2302 (talk) 16:18, 3 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Comment I was ready to !vote this down due to the article's ugly origins. Plenty of UCC such as  . However there may be enough legit reviews to establish notability:
 * CS Monitor
 * Vermont Public Radio
 * Publishers Weekly
 * Cheers — Brianhe (talk) 18:56, 3 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Also, if the claim to have won the Laura Ingalls Wilder Medal is true, that probably meets WP:NBOOK by itself. — Brianhe (talk) 01:13, 4 June 2015 (UTC)
 * I did a search and had some trouble pulling up the site. I found this cached version of the page that doesn't list the specific book but does say that the author won the award. The WP entry for the award gives off the impression that the award is for an author's entire set of works, not for specific individual books. I looked on the author's entry and got this cached version of the specific awards page, which does not mention this book at all. This backs up the idea that she was given the award for her work overall and not for one specific book. In other words, the claim that this specific book won the award is erroneous. However I do think that there are enough sources out there to otherwise show notability. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)  05:37, 4 June 2015 (UTC)
 * And now of course the ALA site comes up. The information still backs up the assertion that this is for an author's overall works. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)  05:39, 4 June 2015 (UTC)


 * Keep. It may not have won any specific awards (see my comments above), but it still received quite a bit of coverage- enough to where it'd merit an article on Wikipedia. I did find some evidence to suggest that it is used in some classrooms, although not really enough to where I'd say that it'd qualify under that criteria. There is some coverage to assert that its author would probably qualify as someone who is so notable that their works would be considered notable as well, although I know that this is often highly debated. Regardless of that, there is enough to show notability for the work as a whole, independently of the author. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)  05:45, 4 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep. Sufficient reliable sources have been found to establish notability.  --Arxiloxos (talk) 14:53, 4 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:13, 4 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:13, 4 June 2015 (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.