Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Devil's Fire

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. NORTH AMERICA¹⁰⁰⁰ 00:58, 3 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The Devil's Fire[edit]

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

This looks to be your standard, run of the mill non-notable book. Other than some non-usable blog reviews and equally non-usable reviews on literary social media and merchant sites, there just isn't anything out there that covers this book. I can't find anything out there to show that this book passes WP:NBOOK. The book exists and looks to be popular enough, but existing is not notability, popularity is not a guarantee that something will gain coverage, and none of the self-published reviews out there are the type that would give notability. (WP:ITEXISTS, WP:POPULARITY, WP:SPS)) Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 00:37, 17 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:42, 18 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:42, 18 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete doesnt meet WP:GNG or WP:NB, thought maybe an article on the trilogy of books or author but again wouldnt meet notability Coolabahapple (talk) 05:31, 22 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Spirit of Eagle (talk) 01:21, 24 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. I can't find any professional reviews. Author's blog doesn't link to any, either. It's very difficult for self-published authors to get any attention, and this seems like another example. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 08:05, 25 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Unable to find reviews in reliable sources that would meet WP:BKCRIT criteria 1, or evidence that the book meets any one of the other criteria in that section. Unable to find significant coverage in reliable independent sources necessary to meet WP:GNG. Worldbruce (talk) 19:41, 26 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. No indication of notability. — Joaquin008 ^(talk) 14:52, 28 February 2015 (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.