Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The House in the Hole in the Side of the Tree


 * 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. Daniel (talk) 10:18, 2 April 2015 (UTC)

The House in the Hole in the Side of the Tree

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

does not meet WP:GNG or WP:NBOOK Coolabahapple (talk) 06:08, 25 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete - No references and no editorial activity since 2011. I have to wonder who is creating these things and why? I am pretty sure I am no longer a dyed-in-the-wool Inclusionist. HullIntegrity  \ talk / 12:30, 25 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 06:17, 25 March 2015 (UTC)


 * Delete Not referenced and not notable.--DThomsen8 (talk) 01:20, 26 March 2015 (UTC)
 * weak keep-I did find a ref here: http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/5023645-the-house-in-the-hole-in-the-side-of-the-tree maybe userfied as well. Wgolf (talk) 02:01, 26 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Goodreads isn't usable as a reliable source. At best it's a database mixed in with a social media outlet since anyone with an account can add a review to Goodreads akin to how anyone with an account can add a review to Amazon or IMDb. It's also not exceedingly difficult to get a book added to Goodreads since you only need to petition a librarian to have the book added and Goodreads is fairly liberal about giving people this position. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)   03:53, 26 March 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.