Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Allan and the Ice-gods

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. Withdrawn by nom (me) (non-admin closure) —me_and 16:30, 30 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Allan and the Ice-gods[edit]

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

Fails WP:BKCRIT and WP:GNG —me_and 19:50, 29 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. czar · · 20:59, 29 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. czar · · 20:59, 29 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep. I wasn't expecting to find anything, given the time period it was released in, but I did manage to find two brief reviews and two mentions of the book in scholarly texts. One of the two authors even mentioned the work twice in two different books/essays she'd written about evolution and eugenics. This isn't much and I'm not opposed to this information being merged into the larger article on Allan Quartermain if someone were to find a way to do so. This does, however, give us just enough to where it could warrant a keep. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 08:18, 30 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
~~Weak keep~~, now sources have been added by Tokyogirl79 (thanks!). I still think it's borderline (hence not withdrawing the nom), but it looks like there's useful information to impart, and I can't see an obvious way to merge it into Allan Quartermain or H. Rider Haggard. —me_and 10:01, 30 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Given Deor's comments as well, I'll withdraw my nom. —me_and 16:30, 30 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Certainly meets criterion 1 of WP:BKCRIT (I have several books on my shelves that include substantial discussion of this novel; there's a whole world apart from what's online) and arguably meets criterion 5 as well: "The book's author is so historically significant that any of his or her written works may be considered notable." Deor (talk) 14:46, 30 April 2013 (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.