Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Being a slut novel

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 delete. G11. T. Canens (talk) 03:31, 27 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Being a slut novel[edit]

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

Soon-to-be self-published debut novel without actual notability yet Fram (talk) 09:46, 20 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Journalism-related deletion discussions. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 10:35, 20 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 10:35, 20 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - promotional and yet to be published novel. Fails GNG and WP:BKCRIT. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 10:39, 20 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Keep It should not be deleted. It is a nice article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 7.30.199.223 (talk • contribs)

Deletion or keeping should be based on notability of the subject, not "niceness" of the article. --ilmaisin (talk) 13:02, 20 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 14:17, 20 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Completely non-notable self-published book. The article provide no reliable sources, and I can find no others. Really, this could almost be a valid Speedy Deletion nomination due to the obvious promotional tone of the article. Rorshacma (talk) 15:27, 20 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy delete per WP:G11. Unreleased and only self-published or user-generated sources, clear promotional tone. Nanophosis (talk) 19:48, 20 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy delete per WP:G11. This is wildly promotional and should be deleted as soon as possible. Best, GPL93 (talk) 20:58, 20 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note the article appears to have been created by the book's author. This is definitely a speedy delete situation. Best, GPL93 (talk) 00:14, 21 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete fails WP:BOOKCRIT. Whole article reads like a promotion, is full of puff and weasel words and provides no proof of notability. Doc Strange^MailboxLogbook 21:21, 20 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, does not meet WP:NBOOK or WP:GNG, zero reliable reviews, doesn't happen often that a gsearch brings up so few hits under book title and author, ie. "Being a slut Mehra", article appears to be created by author, hi Parasmehra199, sorry, but Wikipedia is not here for promotional purposes. ps. an admin might like to close this early. Coolabahapple (talk) 05:47, 22 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as completely failing to reach the notability threshold for books. Given the tone currently used in the article, I wouldn't object to a speedy deletion on spam grounds. Pichpich (talk) 15:12, 22 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy delete per WP:G11.E.M.Gregory (talk) 18:14, 23 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy as G11 per the above. I've also tagged the article. Dusti ^{*Let's talk!*} 03:22, 27 May 2019 (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.