Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sex Object: A Memoir

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 keep. The nominator has withdrawn the nomination and no delete votes. (non-admin closure) GSS (talk|c|em) 11:57, 26 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Sex Object: A Memoir[edit]

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

This is not a notable book (fails WP:NBOOK). Article is just an advertisement. damiens.rf 10:41, 23 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Withdrawn by nominator--please see below. If an admin or clerk could please close. Thanks very much. Innisfree987 (talk) 22:41, 23 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. MT Train^Talk 10:44, 23 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sexuality and gender-related deletion discussions. MT Train^Talk 10:44, 23 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Seems to have enough reviews published in reliable sources to meet WP:NBOOK criterion 1. Here are three: [1] [2] [3] —Granger (talk · contribs) 13:38, 23 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy keep- this book was reviewed by the Guardian and the New York Times and therefore meets WP:NBOOKS. Why was this even nominated? Cait.123 (talk) 14:32, 23 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Keep -- Per previous commenters. Also note reviews by NPR, and in Vogue and Rolling Stone. 192.160.216.52 (talk) 15:27, 23 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Keep although speedy keep by nominator withdrawing would be better. Damiens.rf, even if you had not conducted the research portion of WP:BEFORE, the entry itself already contains references to meet the first criterion in the WP:NBOOK guideline you've cited. Kindly withdraw so as not to waste your fellow editors' time? Innisfree987 (talk) 17:02, 23 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- Actually, I failled to correctly read WP:NBOOKS. I didn't realize reviews would make for notability. The bar is lower than what I expected. Sorry. I withdraw the nomination. --damiens.rf 20:56, 23 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  - Thanks, appreciate your following up! Innisfree987 (talk) 21:12, 23 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Sufficiently referenced from secondary sources.--Ipigott (talk) 14:45, 24 February 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.