Login
Login

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Swing For The Fences

: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) 08:33, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

=[[Swing For The Fences]]=

:{{la|Swing For The Fences}} ([{{fullurl:Swing For The Fences|wpReason={{urlencode: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Swing For The Fences}}&action=delete}} delete]) – (View AfD)(View log)

Contested prod. Novel with no assertion of notability for either itself or its author. [http://www.google.ca/search?hl=en&q=%22Gilli+Braunstein%22+%22Swing+For+The+Fences%22&btnG=Search&meta= This search] returns only primary sources. Possible conflict of interest in the creation of this article. Delete.  Blanchardb -Me•MyEars•MyMouth- timed 04:50, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

  • Delete: Fails WP:BK. Schuym1 (talk) 04:55, 4 January 2009 (UTC)
  • Delete for failing WP:BK. Apparently a self-published book with zero secondary or tertiary sources. A possible WP:VSCA. LeaveSleaves 17:24, 4 January 2009 (UTC)
  • ""Save"" The editors of Wikipedia should stop deleting things that are real. An author has published a book. It's tangible and a literary work. The reference is valid. One day, if you editors are ever capable of writing a book for yourselves, perhaps you'd understand. Until then, your arrogant attitude to deleting valid content decreases the value of wikipedia exponentially. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.230.40.2 (talk) 00:37, 9 January 2009 (UTC)Randy Frid
  • The reliable source doesn't show notability. Wikipedia isn't for all things that exist, it's an encyclopedia and all topics in an encyclopedia need to be notable. Also, read WP:CIVIL. Schuym1 (talk) 00:45, 9 January 2009 (UTC)
  • Also, you'll be interested to know that I am precisely in the process of writing a novel. I have no intention of starting the Wikipedia article on that novel myself, nor commission anyone to do it for me. As was said above, Wikipedia is not for things that are real so much as it is about things that are notable. -- Blanchardb -Me•MyEars•MyMouth- timed 02:11, 9 January 2009 (UTC)
  • Delete Self-published book that fails to meet notability guidelines for books. Abecedare (talk) 04:09, 9 January 2009 (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.