Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Untitled Pocketbook


 * 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. No reliable source to establish notability — G FOLEY   F OUR  — 01:09, 14 March 2011 (UTC)

Untitled Pocketbook

 * – ( View AfD View log )

"Source" provided in the article mentions it extremely briefly and in passing, and doesn't appear to be necessarily reliable in any case&mdash;it looks rather like a blog. Searching for sources doesn't yield anything better, just their own Facebook page and the like. It does not seem that there are sufficient sources to sustain this article. Author is, according to his edit summaries, affiliated with the publisher for this. Seraphimblade Talk to me 08:05, 27 February 2011 (UTC)  Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:33, 6 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 16:55, 28 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Delete. Distinct conflict of interest, and the article is somewhat promotional flavored - but not enough to make me call G11 on it.  Aside from this, this publication still doesn't seem to have much in the way of notability.  Can't work with that unfortunately. -- Dennis The Tiger   (Rawr and stuff) 05:58, 6 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete - no real reliable source to establish notability. Yaksar (let's chat) 05:38, 7 March 2011 (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.