Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Polska Tales

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 no consensus with leave to speedy renominate. (non-admin closure) Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:06, 16 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Polska Tales

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

I have found no sources independent of the subject to demonstrate notability. This appears to have been written by a company that did work on this book to promote it (Geni-i-uk). Author removed my PROD but did not address the lack of independent sources for notability. Fiftytwo thirty (talk) 20:17, 26 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 15:33, 27 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Crosby Herald, 27th May 2010, P20 Newspaper article about Polska Tales. 77.102.201.149 (talk) 16:42, 27 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Same editor has created pages for separate stories in the collection: Golden Friends;Maya's Story;The Journey In Search of Pollen;The Search by Sebastian Rhys Wall;Inside Out by Borys & Jola Kurzeja-Ryan, none of which meet notability guidelines for books and should either be merged into the main article or deleted with it. I've not PRODded them separately as I thought that might not be helpful. Just listed them here--Plad2 (talk) 05:42, 28 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have taken the liberty to redirect all of these articles to Polska Tales, as I feel that they are uncontestably not notable. This article has a third party source, but those articles are easy redirects. If anyone wishes to undo them I will be fine with it if they give me valid reason why the short stories meet WP:NB. Fiftytwo thirty (talk) 20:55, 28 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:09, 2 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Arbitrarily0 ^(talk) 00:44, 9 June 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.