Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/One Rainy Night

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 redirect to Richard Laymon. Content can be merged from history if desired. Sandstein 07:44, 13 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

One Rainy Night[edit]

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

Non notable, unreferenced book from the 1990s. There doesn't seem to be any sources talking about the book other than some blog or WordPress sites. aNode (discuss) 03:37, 6 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Richard Laymon as plausible search term if someone is looking for this book - if the title hasn't been disambiguated by now, I'll assume it's not going to be more plausible as a redirect elsewhere. As it stands on its own, a quick source check doesn't seem to indicate much to establish notability independent of the author. Red Phoenix ^talk 04:45, 6 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. MT Train^Talk 05:55, 6 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. Hhkohh (talk) 06:01, 6 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Merge with and redirect to Richard Laymon - this article is only three lines and three sentences long, and a merge should not prove too difficult. Vorbee (talk) 07:43, 6 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Merge with and redirect to Richard Laymon - agree with others for merge and redirect. --Jaldous1 (talk) 15:43, 6 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. I agree that deletion of this article would violate ATD, PRESERVE and R because the page could be merged and redirected to the author. However, I should point out that there are sources, and these need to actually be examined, as they might establish notability. Simply searching for the name of the book is not much good, because that is not how search engines work. A "quick check" is a complete waste of time. Even this takes several pages of results to yield this. Try instead searches like: [1] [2] [3] [4] etc. Some of those results look like book reviews. James500 (talk) 19:55, 7 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- James500, I parsed the links you posted. When I did a "quick check", I checked for books as well and everything in the WP:BEFORE toolbox, including HighBeam Research, which has an article on Laymon with one paragraph about the book and that's it. What you have in the books links are some brief mentions of One Rainy Night for its concepts, but about a paragraph in two books and just a passing mention in another. There's not a book review actually there, and passing mentions aren't enough to establish notability of the work. If there are book reviews, that's good, but we can't just assume there might be as a hypothetical. I need to see them, or my opinion to redirect the article stands. Red Phoenix ^talk 20:24, 7 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  - The passage in Gauntlet appears to be a (short) book review. Books Magazine [5] and Hispanic Books Bulletin [6] certainly both contain book reviews. NBOOK doesn't require more than two sources and it specifically states that two normal book reviews (or something similar) suffice. James500 (talk) 00:52, 8 July 2018 (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.