Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Posterchildren: Origins


 * 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. j⚛e deckertalk 15:05, 29 May 2014 (UTC)

The Posterchildren: Origins

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

This is a self-published novel that fails our notability guideline for books. Unfortunately, I don't see any professional reviews on a Google search, and the results are basically limited to the author's Tumblr blog. I think it's too soon for this author's works to appear on Wikipedia. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 03:02, 21 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Totally concur; delete. Good luck to the author. DS (talk) 03:33, 21 May 2014 (UTC)


 * Comment: It looks like it was moved to the draftspace by User:JustBerry. Not a bad compromise, but it probably would have been better to wait until the AfD was finished. Personally I'd vote to delete given the fact that this book has received no true coverage to show that it passes WP:NBOOK and to be frank, it likely never will. Most self-published books will never gain coverage enough to pass notability guidelines and I'd say that the likelihood of it gaining this coverage is extremely slim. Basically, it's pretty much destined to sit in draftspace forever. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)   03:58, 21 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Part of what sort of confirms that it won't really gain coverage is that the book has already been out for a year with no actual coverage except for a handful of book blogs. It doesn't seem to have even really gotten any notice in the book blogging world, which is fairly telling. Putting it bluntly, it's extremely EXTREMELY rare for a self-published book to gain mainstream notice when they aren't even really making a splash in the blogging world. It can happen, but it's at the same likelihood as winning a big lottery or getting struck twice by lightning in the same spot. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)   04:02, 21 May 2014 (UTC)
 * I've moved it back to the mainspace and if the consensus is to move it back to the draft space then that's fine, but I think that moving it to draftspace while it's still at AfD is a bit premature. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)   04:04, 21 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Sorry about that, it's just that there were too many complaints on IRC by multiple helpers for PROD/SPEEDY. I thought moving it off the mainspace would allow the article to be further discussed upon before putting it back in the mainspace. --JustBerry (talk) 04:33, 21 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:13, 21 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:13, 21 May 2014 (UTC)


 * Delete does not meet notability.--Theredproject (talk) 14:57, 23 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete nn. book. jni (delete)...just not interested 18:08, 26 May 2014 (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.