Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Frenalose Galaxy Collection

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. Hut 8.5 07:39, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] The Frenalose Galaxy Collection

The Frenalose Galaxy Collection (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

Non-notable trilogy published by vanity publisher. No GHits for reviews from reputable sources. Kim Dent-Brown ^{(Talk to me)} 21:44, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

• Delete, vanity press, and it's interesting that all three of the people who commented on the books at amazon.com have only commented on these books. Corvus cornix 23:42, 25 October 2007 (UTC)
• Delete per above. Stifle (talk) 10:39, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
• Delete - series published through a self-publishing press. No independent reviews or coverage from reliable sources to indicate notability -- Whpq 16:26, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
• weak keep from a biased source as I wrote the article and it's my first, fresh out of the sandbox. It does need a tag requesting third party sources (though I don't know how, yet). It seems to qualify as allowed per WP:V "Material from self-published and questionable sources may be used as sources in articles about themselves, so long as...". The plan is to add to it with 3rd party sources, explanations about what the fictional "Frenalose Galaxy" is, cover picture, and other relevant information. Currently, all included content is factual and verifiable.--Meekil 18:17, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

• Factual and verifiable perhaps, but sadly not notable. The policy on vanity publishing says: "...it should be especially noted that self-publication and/or publication by a vanity press is indicative, but not determinative of non-notability....By the same token, it should always weigh against an article's inclusion if the author or other interested party is the creator of the Wikipedia article." Kim Dent-Brown ^{(Talk to me)} 18:24, 26 October 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.