Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Beautiful Darkness (novel) (2nd nomination)

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The result was nomination withdrawn. Ron Ritzman (talk) 03:08, 1 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Beautiful Darkness (novel)[edit]

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

Previous AfD was all delete votes but didn't get enough input, so I'm renominating it ~~for failing the same criteria.~~ Yaksar (let's chat) 04:52, 30 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Week Delete (Per prev. AfD.) Article does not demonstrate any notability (and lacks major points such as who the author is), however some RS may exist about the book. OSborn^arf_contribs. 04:58, 30 March 2011 (UTC) See below.[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 12:52, 30 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep I found some coverage, please, check the article again. I think there's a possibility to compile a decent article based on reliable sources. --Vejvančický (talk | contribs) 14:27, 30 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, bordering on strong keep. New York Times bestsellers typically get significant coverage, even though such book coverage often isn't web-indexed very well, but requires access to specialized databases or print sources. Worldcat search shows the book is held in nearly 1000 libraries. Amazon listing shows multiple RS reviews -- PW, SLJ, Booklist, Kirkus, etc. Even MTV covers the series it's part of [1], with more enthusiasm than it shows for most music. Hullaballoo Wolfowitz (talk) 20:19, 30 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I've struck out my actual vote, I'm neutral now.--Yaksar (let's chat) 20:33, 30 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Keep New York Times bestseller means probably notable. (Although WP:NBOOK doesn't seem to mention it?) OSborn^arf_contribs. 21:04, 30 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I think this can be closed now.--Yaksar (let's chat) 00:20, 31 March 2011 (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.