Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lies (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 Speedy delete. Non-admin closure --Lenticel ^(talk) 12:45, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Lies (Novel)

Lies (Novel) (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

The links don't lead anywhere, and there is no such book on Amazon. Pretty sure this is a hoax. Even if it should prove not to be, there are issues with copyvio and notability. Also nominating author biography, and any other related pages. Lampman (talk) 11:21, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

• Delete even if it were "real", a vanity-press/self-published book wouldn't be notable anyway. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 11:30, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
• Delete. For reasons stated above. "...award winning novel...", no mention of what award, when it was awarded, or any citation to prove it. Completely fails all notability guidlines. Nouse4aname (talk) 11:59, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
  • Comment I believe that the book may well exist, however, it seems that the entire content of the article is copy and pasted from [1]. Neither the author nor the novel currently seem notable enough to warrant an article, especially one that appears self-written and only serves as a bit of free publicity. I would suggest deleting asap. Nouse4aname (talk) 12:06, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
• Response I am very new to wikipedia, as well as to it's formatting/copyright rules. I read all the tutorials, and supplementary information, but am unsure as to what violation you are referring to. Rather than abrasively pushing for deletion, attempting to help me correct whatever issues are present would make for a stronger display of professionalism. I assure you, there is no hoax on either of the pages, and resent the implication. I am more than willing to learn, and I have several articles I wish to add following the resolution of this issue. Enigma// (talk) 11:45, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
  • Please see WP:BK and, more generally, WP:N. It looks like WP:COI and WP:SPAM are relevant to the matter as well. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 11:57, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
  • Comment You need to let the deletion debate take its turn, and if the community agrees with you, the article will remain. What you must not do is remove the deletion template from the page. This is considered vandalism, and it will not help your case in any way. Rather it will show bad faith on your part, and strengthen the case for deletion. You have done it three times already, if you do it again you will be reported and blocked from edited. Also, I don't know if you are the subject of this article yourself, but if you are, please read Wikipedia:Autobiography. Lampman (talk) 12:00, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

• I have read all of the information provided, and I believe I understand your basis for concern. What is the next step then? Enigma// (talk) 12:05, 1 February 2008 (UTC)Enigma//
  • I am sorry if I assumed bad faith at first, I didn't mean to bite the newcomer. As for these articles, I don't think there is anything that can be done to save them, simply on issues of notability. Your edits are impressive for a newcomer though, and if you have contributions you wish to make on notable subjects, these would be most welcome. Lampman (talk) 12:13, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

• Understandable. I mean, let's face facts, it was shameless self-endorsement, and I didn't think it would be cracked down on. Evidently I was wrong. It would still be pretty sweet to keep them. As for your apology, I appreciate it. I do try hard to learn quickly, and to use proper format in all things; so thanks. By the way, how did you all discover the article so quickly, and already have time to investigate it? I barely finised typing. Enigma// (talk) 12:16, 1 February 2008 (UTC)Enigma//
  • And I appreciate your refreshing honesty! Some of us patrol Special:Newpages regularly, to see if recently created pages violate policy. Lampman (talk) 12:23, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

• So, is there anyway/did you want me to remove these articles myself? Is it just the book article, or the biography as well? Enigma// (talk) 12:25, 1 February 2008 (UTC)Enigma//
  • You can replace the tag with {{Db-author}} which will indicate that the author wants the article deleted right away. And yes, I did have the biography in mind as well. Lampman (talk) 12:29, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

• Check the two pages, and let me know if everything looks in order. I put that speedy deletion thing in, but I'm not sure if I did it right. Thanks. Enigma// (talk) 12:41, 1 February 2008 (UTC)Enigma//

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.