Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/When You Don't Have A Pen, You Die.

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. §FreeRangeFrog^croak 17:27, 23 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

When You Don't Have A Pen, You Die.[edit]

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

Unsourced article about a non-notable book. Fails WP:NBOOK. - Mr X 02:53, 16 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per MrX. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 02:58, 16 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Delete fails WP:GNG,WP:NBOOK, and WP:WEB (it is an e-book, after all). —Lucas Thoms, formerly My Ubuntu (talk) 03:14, 16 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Strong delete. Author's page already deleted via AfD process: see WP:Articles for deletion/Gwen Chua. No reason for a non-notable work by a non-notable author to have an article. —C.Fred (talk) 03:17, 16 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Delete and salt. There are no sources at all about this book and none about the author. Given that the book cover is in English and the author's blog is in English, it's fairly telling that there are no sources for this book apart from this article. Given that the articles for the author were re-created so many times, I recommend salting this article after it is deleted because it will become necessary. I also note that there seems to be some socking going on here and it looks to be more than one account, so I'll be opening an SPI. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 03:38, 16 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I took a better look at the edits and it's such an obvious case of sockpuppetry that it's not worth taking to SPI, given how loud the quacking is and how backlogged SPI is at this point in time, so I've blocked the applicable accounts. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 03:49, 16 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete utterly devoid of any sources, should really be a CSD except that doesn't cover books. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 10:30, 16 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:24, 17 June 2014 (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.