Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Incredible Origins of the Onyx Sun


 * 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. Vanamonde (Talk) 19:01, 17 May 2019 (UTC)

The Incredible Origins of the Onyx Sun

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

A self published book of dubious notability. Despite the claim in the opening line, it did not, in fact, actually win any awards. It was, instead, just a runner up in two, fairly non-notable, awards. I have not been able to find any reviews from reliable sources on the book, as well. The article says that Publishers Weekly created a review of it, and though that review seems to be now unavailable, the entirely of it is included in the article, which consists only of a short paragraph. Searching for any other sources brings up nothing but its pages on online marketplaces or listings on pages such as Goodreads. Rorshacma (talk) 17:10, 10 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. MrClog (talk) 17:55, 10 May 2019 (UTC)


 * Delete - per nom. --MrClog (talk) 17:56, 10 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Comment, found a small Midwest Book Review review (under "The Fantasy/SciFi Shelf" here), unable to find the PW review, nor here (doesn't mean there isn't a review), doesn't appear to be widely known: library holdings of one, so more is needed for notability. Coolabahapple (talk) 13:17, 12 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete - does not meet WP:NBOOK which requires appearances in two or more non-trivial sources, so one brief write-up in Publishers Weekly does not establish notability - and has not "won a major literary award." - therefore, delete - Epinoia (talk) 16:58, 15 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. Fails WP:NBOOK, and the article was also created by a WP:SPA and written in a pretty promotional style, so I think it also fails on WP:NOTPROMOTION grounds, too. - GretLomborg (talk) 17:35, 17 May 2019 (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.