Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Love Machine (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. Cirt (talk) 00:09, 3 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Love Machine (Novel)[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Non-notable unreleased book lacking GHits of substance and with zero GNEWS. Appears to fail WP:NOTBOOK. ttonyb (talk) 03:08, 27 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: I can't find significant coverage for this book. Joe Chill (talk) 03:33, 27 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom, not notable. It amazes me that the author of this article can't see the difference between an encyclopedia article and a book review and chose to write the latter. --96.233.40.199 (talk) 05:17, 27 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 16:00, 27 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. —Grahame (talk) 10:17, 28 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. No sourced notability; even the author himself doesn't have an article. In fact, in accordance with CSD A9, I'd like to suggest that the parallel "an article about a book that does not indicate why its subject is important or significant and where the author's article does not exist" should probably also be added to the speedy criteria. Bearcat (talk) 22:51, 29 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Per the above reasons, really just a lack of notability. It's also in violation of WP:INDISCRIMINATE, being a "Plot-only description of [a] fictional work" Lord Spongefrog, (I am Czar of all Russias!) 19:12, 31 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

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.