Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hey! (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 — Caknuck (talk) 07:31, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Hey! (novel)

Hey! (novel) (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

A self-published book with little to indicate that it is in any way notable. The sole third-party source is a linked article to The Swindon Advertiser, presented as a press report on controversy created by the novel. In fact, the story reports that the author expects controversy. I can find no evidence that the prediction came true, nor can I find any other coverage of the book. Fails WP:BK Victoriagirl (talk) 02:50, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

• Delete per nom. The article does fail WP:BK easily, and it does not appear that more sources will surface soon. --lifebaka (Talk - Contribs) 02:54, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
• Delete per nom. The predicted controversy does not seem to have materialized. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 07:14, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
• Delete self-published books are pretty much non-notable by definition. Seems like the author was fishing for controversy but nobody actually cared enough to be outraged by it. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 19:32, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
• Delete per WP:BK and lack of substantial third-party sources. Barno (talk) 19:35, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
• Delete. Very little in the way of sourcing to indicate that this is a notable book. Capitalistroadster (talk) 19:51, 6 December 2007 (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.