Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Armageddon Pills

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. - Mailer Diablo 11:33, 23 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Armageddon Pills[edit]

I tagged this for speedy deletion as a short article with no context. User:Hesperian removed the tag and added a New York Times reference,[1] however I would argue that (a) the book is still apparently a work in progress, and I cannot find sufficient publication information to suggest that this is not still a case of crystal ball-style prediction, and (b) the NYT article is about a general phenomenon (GeoTagging), and the book has only a single trivial reference, thus not being a sufficient indicator of notability. Confusing Manifestation 06:53, 18 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, no context, fails WP:CRYSTAL. Realkyhick 07:51, 18 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, briefest of brief articles, not even an ISBN, non-notable book at this stage. Kim Dent-Brown ^{(Talk to me)} 08:10, 18 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, Absolutely no context. Elmo 08:11, 18 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. Those who think this article has no context should look "context" up in a dictionary, and then read the speedy deletion criteria again. Clearly it has context. Having said that, I say delete as non-notable, since there is evidently no prospect of writing an article about this book based on reliable third-party sources. Hesperian 11:38, 18 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Non-notable drug. Appears to be an indiscriminate info.--Edtropolis 14:30, 18 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- I have struck the above comment by someone who evidently didn't actually read the article. Hesperian 00:40, 19 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete — Agree that is non-notable and I agree with User:Hesperian that future prospects are slim. JodyB_talk 15:33, 18 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete- per all of the above. Eddie 22:19, 18 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Unless the author provides a context, if add one, may my vote would have changed--JForget 00:14, 19 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete — No notability at all. Perhaps the author can find some references and information to prove it's notable it could be kept, but I don't thnk that would be an easy task... *Cremepuff 222* 00:32, 19 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Per all the above. Not notable. A1octopus 22:46, 20 June 2007 (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.