Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Lost Age : Throne Of Purvakhand


 * 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. &mdash; Spaceman  Spiff  04:04, 29 September 2016 (UTC)

The Lost Age : Throne Of Purvakhand

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

I came across this as an WP:A11 nomination, however since it's a book it doesn't qualify under any of the current criteria. (However there is an attempt to add this as a criteria here, albeit only for books self-published via specific publishers, where the author has no article and there is no assertion of notability.)

There's nothing out there to show that this self-published book is ultimately notable enough for an article. The author doesn't have an article, nor does he seem notable enough to warrant one. This looks to be your typical non-notable self-published book. I wish the author well, but this just doesn't pass WP:NBOOK. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)  08:59, 14 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)  14:34, 14 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)  14:36, 14 September 2016 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 05:59, 21 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete Article has been created by the author himself with 0 references. The novel is not notable. It has been recently released in August. It is self published and there is 0 reception about it, not even by non-RS sources. Google gives a few dozens links to wiki mirrors and amazon where he sells it in the kindle shop. Fails WP:GNG and WP:NBOOK in all points and should be deleted. Dead Mary (talk) 16:27, 21 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete Unable to find reliable sources which would evidence notability under GNG or NBOOK. --joe deckertalk 03:34, 29 September 2016 (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.