Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Unlikely Sanctuary (manga)

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. KTC (talk) 00:39, 3 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Unlikely Sanctuary (manga)

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

Non-notable. Adam9007 (talk) 21:03, 26 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Anime and manga-related deletion discussions. Sam Sailor ^Talk! 10:37, 27 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. Sam Sailor ^Talk! 10:38, 27 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as this current article Seemingly has not even minimal signs of better notability and improvement. SwisterTwister talk 17:15, 27 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. I wish the author well, but at this point the series hasn't received any coverage in places that would be considered an independent and reliable source per WP:RS. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 06:16, 28 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy Delete. This isn't manga per WP:MANGA criteria. No mention on Publisher's Weekly or School Library Journal. Heck, this isn't even on Amazon.How is this even notable per WP:BKCRIT. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 09:13, 28 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Not notable. There's absolutely no sources except for the author's blog. I understand the wish to make her work known, but Wikipedia isn't the place for that. -- 山村貞子 (talk) 19:46, 28 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy Delete. I can only logically assume this is advertising spam, quite probably either by the author, or a fan/associate. SephyTheThird (talk) 00:38, 29 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Not notable.DaveApter (talk) 15:59, 30 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy Date per WP:G11, blatant promotion. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 02:19, 31 December 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.