Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Mayan Priest


 * 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. -- Cirt (talk) 01:19, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

The Mayan Priest

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

Delete. Newly created article concerning a novel that fails to meet any of the notability criteria for inclusion as specified in guidelines on book notability. The book is essentially a self-published novel (author pays the publisher Sid Harta to produce the work, not the other way around) issued in 2010. Going by info at the publishing firm's website, it looks probable that print run is not typically extended beyond galley stage. Article contains no sources or links to independent reviews, commentaries, awards or other materials that might indicate any degree of notability, and neither are such sources to be found when conducting internet search on either title/author. Likewise, searches on independent commentary on the author (apparently with one other novel published by the same outfit) return zero indications of notability. The article consists of nothing more than a synopsis, much of which mirrors info at the publisher's site. Article contains no statements to indicate why the book might be notable. For all I know the novel might be a cracking read, but unfortunately unless demonstration of notability can be found it doesn't meet inclusion criteria. cjllw ʘ  TALK 01:34, 8 April 2010 (UTC)  Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:06, 15 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions.  —cjllw  ʘ  TALK 01:40, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete. If it's vanity publishing (i.e. author pays publisher) then it should be deleted. Unless it becomes a highly notable book and then someone can re-write it.
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.


 * Delete, per nom. -- Nuujinn (talk) 21:50, 19 April 2010 (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.