Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Lazarus Covenant


 * 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. Fritzpoll (talk) 16:39, 19 March 2009 (UTC)

The Lazarus Covenant

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

Article about an unpublished thriller, "to be released on May 1, 2009". Almost entirely plot summary, over 1,200 words. Input by SPA author, who has also input an article about the author - see his AfD above. Fails WP:BK. Contested PROD; intent is clearly promotion, but Wikipedia is not an advertising service. Delete. JohnCD (talk) 17:18, 14 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete - per nom. Also: (1) The book is unpublished, (2) the publisher is brand-new and likely non-notable itself, and might be a self-publisher, I can't really tell. (3) The cited NY Times article is completely unrelated, it does not mention the book or author as far as I can tell. &mdash; LinguistAtLarge • Talk  20:36, 14 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment - it does indeed seem to be self-publishing, in fact a family affair. The author's wife Ciri Fenzel is Founder and President of the publisher BREATHE; on the website's blog she signs herself "Ciri Raynor Fenzel", and the article author is Craynor1. BREATHE seems to be mainly a marketing/PR consultancy; as far as I can discover from the web-site they are new into publishing and this is their first and so far only book. I am surprised that professional marketers have not learned that WP is not the place to seek free publicity. JohnCD (talk) 21:21, 14 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Note - If this is deleted, it is with no prejudice against it being re-created after the book is published and notability established via reliable sources. &mdash; LinguistAtLarge • Talk  20:37, 14 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete with the Linguist's caveat--but if it comes back, I hope it won't be so spammy. Drmies (talk) 20:45, 14 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete per nom,fails WP:CRYSTAL and spammy. ukexpat (talk) 21:09, 14 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Note - the article has been semi-protected because of repeated removal of the AfD template by different IPs. JohnCD (talk) 21:21, 14 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. In addition, it's apparently a self-published work and there is no indication of notability (some not-yet-published books are notable, this one does not appear to be so). --Bonadea (talk) 23:42, 14 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment It's clearly not self-published. But several alarm bells are going off in my head as I read the website of the publisher. It's full of unclear marketing speak and phrases to reel in newbie writers who don't get their talent recognized by others. It's usually a bad sign when publishers also run other services on the side. I'll check with an expert. - Mgm|(talk) 23:47, 14 March 2009 (UTC)
 * It's not a publisher running other services on the side; it's a retail marketing consultancy which is going into publishing on the side - see below. JohnCD (talk) 21:53, 15 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete, book has not yet been released. Who then was a gentleman? (talk) 03:40, 15 March 2009 (UTC)

Library of Congress Control Number: 2009901671 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Craynor1 (talk • contribs) 03:52, March 15, 2009 — Craynor1 (talk&#32;• contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * KEEP - Rebuttal to JohnCD and MacGyverMagic: The novel IS currently published and is currently available direct from the publisher (www.breathepress.com).  General Release in brick and mortar retail stores is scheduled for 1 May as a deliberate release plan.  BREATHE Press is a small, independent publisher--NOT a vanity press (LULU, iUniverse, Print-on-Demand etc.).  The book is being produced in traditional "offset printing."  Additional details of publication are available from the publisher: www.breathepress.com or by emailing: info@breathepress.com  In fact, the novel is the first title for BREATHE Press as the publishing house was established in 2009.  Does a new business constitute "non-notability" for its product?  More titles from other authors are planned.  All major publishers have resident marketing, media relations and PR in-house capabilities.  Few small, independent publishers have a similar capability; however, BREATHE Press has that resident capability.  Publishing, marketing, media relations and Public Relations are, by their very nature, interdependent.
 * As provided in the references, the novel's ISBN and Library of Congress control numbers are freely available for confirmation: ISBN 978-0-9822379-0-8
 * The NYT article, in fact, suggests current RELEVANCE of the novel, as it describes a coincidental resurgence of instability in Bosnia, which mirrors the plot of the novel, as stated. The reference does not purport or attempt to claim mention of the novel.
 * The Wikipedia page is not designed to "seek free publicity," as is alleged--and uses a similar template/methodology used in pages for other novels in the same genre.
 * I'm not familiar with the details of iUniverse, but the things I heard about it are not good. You are however mixing up vanity publishing and self-publishing. See this page for a good list of definitions. Lulu falls squarely in the self-publishing category. - Mgm|(talk) 10:56, 15 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete per nom. WP:CRYSTAL, WP:COI and WP:SPAM. EconomicsGuy (talk) 06:14, 15 March 2009 (UTC)
 * KEEP : MacGyverMagic, I would respectfully request close consideration of the rebuttal provided:  BREATHE Press is NOT iUniverse.  It is NOT Lulu.  It is NOT Print-on-Demand.  The Lazarus Covenant IS a traditional offset printed novel with a large first printing by a small, independent (sole proprietorship) printer that does NOT fit into any of the self-publishing categories cited on this talk/discussion page.  The Lazarus Covenant has an ISBN and a Library of Congress Control Number.  It also is currently available.  I am a new user to WP, and would appreciate experienced users' assistance in creation of this page to demonstrate notability of this novel.  The WP page for The Lazarus Covenant closely follows the same template and methodologies/best practices for other novels.  The intent in creating the page is not free publicity--but awareness of a notable novel that is both substantive and compelling.  If there is a perception that self-promotion is an objective/goal, I would be happy to make recommended edits from you and other experienced users.  Thanks, in advance, for your assistance.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Craynor1 (talk • contribs) 12:30, 15 March 2009 (UTC)  — Craynor1 (talk&#32;• contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * Comment Please only !vote once. Edward321 (talk)
 * Comment - correct me if I am wrong, but it seems that BREATHE is a retail marketing consulting firm, founded by its president Ciri Raynor Fenzel, which has newly set up a publishing arm in order to publish Ms Fenzel's husband's book. If not self-publishing, that is very near it. JohnCD (talk) 21:53, 15 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment The important question is whether the book is notable. That it has an ISBN number and a LoC number only shows that it exists; that it deals with notable current events does not make it notable in itself. The notability of the publishing house also isn't the primary indicator of notability for the book (though it can be one indicator). Please have a look at the notability criteria for books - that's what the article needs to show that the book meets. --Bonadea (talk) 13:51, 15 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete per JohnCD, LinguistAtLarge and ukexpat above. Offset printed? I wouldn't really have expected letterpress. I quote from the Wikipedia article on offset: "The majority of modern day printing is still done using the offset printing process.". Looking at the book, I am intrigued by having someone flee from Yugoslavia to Northern Ireland. Which is the frying pan and which the fire? Those things aside, the two words that come to mind are TOO SOON. If Wikipedia had been around at the time of the launch of Virgin Records' first release Tubular Bells, this record and company would have been regarded as non-notable. A few months later..... Come back when there is success (or notoriety - that can be notable too...). For now, I wish you luck with both the book and the publishing venture. It's a tough world to be in. Peridon (talk) 14:44, 15 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment "The intent in creating the page is not free publicity--but awareness of a notable novel that is both substantive and compelling." SPiced hAM and chopped ham with pork taste very similar when grilled. Is not making people aware very similar to getting publicity? Peridon (talk) 14:52, 15 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Strong Delete The article is advertising for an unreleased book.  It appears to be self-published and the publishers own website argues against notability by saying it "was established in 2009 to publish new, virtually unknown authors".  And there are zero independant sources about this book. Edward321 (talk) 15:18, 15 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. Nothing here establishes notability for this book which has either not been released yet, or has just been released, I can't figure out which is the case. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 16:48, 15 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete book does not meet the notability requirements of WP:BK, re-create article when he book has been the subject of multiple, non-trivial published works whose sources are independent of the book itself. Some of these works should contain sufficient critical commentary to allow the article to grow past a simple plot summary. --Captain-tucker (talk) 09:35, 16 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. Also, not that it matters here, but the writer could do at least some research about the location of the novel. Admiral Norton (talk) 16:18, 16 March 2009 (UTC)
 * On the same tack, I thought the mass executions and 'troubles' in Yugoslavia came well after Tito. In Tito's later years, Yugoslavia was an open country with a booming tourist trade. Peridon (talk) 23:06, 16 March 2009 (UTC)
 * The late 1940s and early 1950s after WW2 were the espionage time and people were sent to penitentiary and sentenced to death for this. Later, the country was very stable and had a booming economy under Tito until his death in 1980s when an inflation started (my uncle had bought a Ferrari on a ten-year loan in 1979 and in mid-80s he paid off the whole loan using a month's pay). In the early 1990s, a series of wars happened and were followed by a stop of inflation as each new country adopted its own currency and a major economical decline. In 2000s, the economy is booming again, although Croatia and Slovenia have much higher standards and GDP than the rest of former Yugoslavia. That's about it. No war heroes became archbishops of the Croatian capital. Admiral Norton (talk) 18:38, 17 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Question: Why have all of the links to The Lazarus Covenant in the John Fenzel article been replaced with external links to his website? Who then was a gentleman? (talk) 18:22, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
 * I've just looked back in the history - I don't think they've been changed. The earliest versions have links to the website not to the Wikipedia article. Peridon (talk) 20:22, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
 * So then there has never been another article that links to this one. Who then was a gentleman? (talk) 20:45, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
 * If there is, Craynor1 didn't add the link. It's not easy to check going that way - unless you're a bot with time to spare. The Lazarus Covenant has a link to John Fenzel but there's no link the other way. Interesting... Peridon (talk) 21:01, 17 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Strong delete and Salt - shameless promotional push by s.p.a. account. -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  17:20, 18 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete Well qualified to write a good thriller, but that doesnt guarantee the result. This is a pre= prepublication hype & promotion for what might turn out to be a ntable book, or might turn out a flop. In the case of a well established authors, all of hose books are notable, we can say the next one on the same lines will be also. But this is his first novel.DGG (talk) 08:28, 19 March 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.