Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Twenty-four Hours (novel)


 * 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. Courcelles 06:22, 13 December 2010 (UTC)

Twenty-four Hours (novel)

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Non-notable book, there is no speedy deletion criterion for books, so we have to go with AfD. Corvus cornix talk  07:07, 6 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Speedy Delete A1 - Article lacks sufficient context to identify which of a large number of books entitled "Twenty-Four Hours" it might be referring to, and therefore is unable to be meaningfully expanded. (Failing speedy delete, it also should be deleted for failing the general notability guidelines.) - DustFormsWords (talk) 08:00, 6 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment I'm a bit confused. Instead of welcoming a new user and asking them for a more detailed explanation and sourcing, Corvus nominated the article for deletion two minutes after its creation. Not everyone is a born Wikipedian, people learn how to edit. You have the opportunity to help or assist, so why the rush to delete the article? --Vejvančický (talk | contribs) 09:55, 6 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Because spamming is frowned upon.  Corvus cornix  talk  18:56, 6 December 2010 (UTC)
 * So is biting the newbies, not to mention quick-draw deletion nominations. - The Bushranger Return fire Flank speed 19:27, 6 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Neither of which is a policy, nor is there anything in this article which claims notability, not is it anything other than a book review, which is a violation of WP:OR and WP:NPOV, not to mention WP:V. Got any  more acronyms you want to throw at me to show how much superior you are to me?  And why is it all right to BITE the creator of Educational Segregation in Sunflower County, Mississippi?   Corvus cornix  talk  22:18, 6 December 2010 (UTC)
 * That article was not nominated for deletion two minutes after it was created, and was extensively worked on in userspace first. They knew what they were doing, and the article had time to be worked on after being added. I'm not disputing that this article should be Deleted, just that it's borderline on assuming bad faith to zap an article so quickly, IMHO. - The Bushranger Return fire Flank speed 23:07, 6 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions.  -- Jclemens-public (talk) 17:38, 6 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete, two sentence book review with no claim to notability. Hairhorn (talk) 22:34, 6 December 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.