Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Treasures of the Snow


 * 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The result was   keep or "nomination withdrawn", take your pick. (non-admin closure) Ron Ritzman (talk) 23:51, 15 August 2010 (UTC)

Treasures of the Snow

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

In its current state, no demonstration of notability, though apparently this book was made into a movie (looking at a quick search), which may be the saving grace for this article. As it is I could A7 it without anyone caring, but this article might be a candidate for a rescue. Raymie Humbert (t • c) 04:28, 2 August 2010 (UTC)  Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:01, 9 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 15:34, 2 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Weak keep Could not find Reliable Sources about this book, but the publisher claims it was a " continual best seller since its first publication more than 20 years ago" and was reprinted more than 20 times. I would like to see some independent confirmation, but let's face it, "Christian" literature rarely gets much coverage. I could give this one a pass. --MelanieN (talk) 23:10, 8 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.


 * Delete - Treasures of the snow is a novel by Patricia St. John. It is about one boy's mistake. That's the page. All of it. Non-notable, unwikified, unsourced vacuousness... Carrite (talk) 03:05, 9 August 2010 (UTC) Comment - Much improved now, no opinion as to worthiness of inclusion one way or the other. Carrite (talk) 22:18, 9 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep – I will try to make this into a WP article (made a start this morning, but need more time). Keep for the moment until I've had a few days to make something of it. – Hebrides (talk) 06:28, 9 August 2010 (UTC)
 * I've now had a go at turning this into an acceptable WP article. The plot summary still remains to be done (I commented out the empty section header until some content has been written). Comments/contributions would be welcome. — Hebrides (talk) 11:01, 9 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Much improved but I'd like to see a bit more improvement - especially plotwise - until I pull the plug on the AfD. The New Raymie (t • c) 00:45, 12 August 2010 (UTC)
 * OK, I just borrowed the book from the public library today. Give me time to read it and I'll summarise the story for the article. Didn't just want to paraphrase a secondhand summary… — Hebrides (talk) 19:25, 12 August 2010 (UTC)
 * I've added a plot summary to the article, plus a short "Background" section. I'm not used to working on this type of article, so I looked at articles like The Wind in the Willows and Treasure Island to get some idea of the amount of detail that is expected in a plot summary. – Hebrides (talk) 18:37, 15 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Perfect. None of my concerns apply about this article now, so I'm effectively withdrawing my nomination and waiting for closure. The New Raymie (t • c) 19:07, 15 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks. Glad you originally decided to go for an AfD instead of an A7 – I unexpectedly got to read a well-written and thought-provoking little story because of your decision, and Wikipedia gained another article. — Hebrides (talk) 21:10, 15 August 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.