Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Beautiful Darkness (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 delete without prejudice. Treating as an uncontested PROD~~ Changing to no consensus with leave to speedy renominate Ron Ritzman (talk) 01:07, 30 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Beautiful Darkness (novel)

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

Prod removed without reason. Non-notable book. Fails WP:GNG and WP:NBOOK. —Gƒoley Four— 02:25, 9 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as a prodder - didn't realize you had prodded it first. OSborn^arf_contribs. 02:30, 9 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 02:49, 9 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I note that the book in question has been reviewed in the usual places, and it has also appeared in other published sources, such as [1]. I'm not sure that the article as currently written is particularly helpful, though. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tom Harris (talk • contribs) 21:27, 9 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:14, 16 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 06:43, 23 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.