Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Littletown Breadmill

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. Tyrenius (talk) 03:55, 25 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Littletown Breadmill[edit]

Non-notable self-published book; article written primarily by book author, who admits that he wrote the article in an effort to get the book made into a movie. Only alleged ~~(and unreferenced)~~ claim to notability is that the book won an award in a writing contest based on the number of words written. Russ (talk) 18:42, 19 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Slight correction. The article does contain a reference to the National Novel Writing Month website. Following the FAQ link on that site reveals that everyone who writes 50,000 words or more during that month is presented with an award, so this really can't count as an assertion of notability. --Russ (talk) 19:20, 19 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Not published, not reviewed, not notable. —Quasirandom (talk) 19:34, 19 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete not surprisingly, no independent sources to establish notability. Maralia (talk) 20:59, 19 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as spam. And not notable. And spa. and everything Wikipedia isn't. Keeper | 76 22:12, 19 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - the more I look into this it appears to be spam or at worst self promotion. Very poor argumentation for retention. :: Kevinalewis : ^{(Talk Page)}/_(Desk) 16:48, 20 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Keep With all do respect, this is not a spam nor an effort for self promotion. When i created this page, i had in my mind that wikipedia needs to handle more Filipino stories. Also, the award is real to those who really made their novels. I believe it needs to be noted not for self-glorification but for further classification of the quality of the work and what makes it special(not all winners finish their stories and not all are off to getting them published). Not published(yet), not reviewed(no professional reviews yet). If the basis for deletion is copyright, everything is copyright. even what you just typed is copyrighted by you. copyright is not the certificate but rather an intangible thing that occurs between the product and the maker in the instant of it's creation. setting the technicality aside, i wish to point out that the excerpt section will have to be renamed to a more appropriate title. this is somewhat of an overview of what the story is roughly about, readers need to know what a story is roughly all about. Thank you for your concern to this article, whether it be positive or negative. My main goal here is to inform searchers that this is a story that had been written from the Philippines and the NaNoWriMo. I'll try to place the titles of some of the big titled stories that had won the NaNoWriMo event on a new section of the page if you guys think it could help. It's hard to prove to you this is no advertising feat but i would like to tell you that it's not and i if it's starting to sound like one with all the editing, please assist me into making it work more for the interest of wikipedia. Thank you very much. Xrecent (talk) 17:25, 20 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- No, the basis for deletion is not copyright. The basis for deletion is what you said yourself -- "Not published(yet), not reviewed(no professional reviews yet)." Wikipedia is not a listing of every book ever written, only the notable ones. I invite you to follow that last link to see the criteria explained in more detail. --Russ (talk) 18:45, 20 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  - Thank you Russ and everyone here for the links you have provided. I have in fact followed the links you gave me. I can see that this article may be posted too soon and because of that I would like to ask when will it be most appropriate to post this article if ever it should be deleted. Since it has already been proposed for removal, upon its likely deletion, when will it be most appropriate to possibly reposting/reconstructing it. Again I will further emphasis that my goal here is to populate the category for Filipino novels. I’m already researching for published works but so far, this is the entry that I am having much issue with. I am learning a lot of things from this and will surely take those into account for the next articles that I will be contributing. Also, is there no part of this that can be possibly salvaged rather than deleted? Upon reading the section of notability, I can see what you mean by not being notable enough. And true, it currently is not 'yet' that notable. I think I may have to conform to your suggestion but I am still hoping some parts of this may be salvaged or possibly reconstructed, retained or rebuilt...presently or on a later date. Thank you very much. Xrecent (talk) 01:56, 21 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - no evidence of notability in the form of independent book reviews etc. -- Whpq (talk) 21:16, 20 December 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.