Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/AlphaPets
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The printable version is no longer supported and may have rendering errors. Please update your browser bookmarks and please use the default browser print function instead.
- 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 no consensus. leaning keep. Almost evenly split, keeps are slightly stronger in backing up. Relisting with this amount of participatin already is not likely to create consensus. TravellingCari 04:04, 9 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
AlphaPets
- AlphaPets (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
I can't find any reliable sources that show notability for this series of books. Schuym1(talk) 23:08, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep per [1], [2], and [3], [4]. Author should have done a bit of sourcing. Schmidt, MICHAEL Q. 00:14, 5 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep through some reviews need to be found. Given the years the work was published, that a title selected at random , is still in almost 300 libraries is very highly notable for this sort of very elementary book.[5] It is not necessary to search libraries one by one through Google. DGG (talk) 03:56, 5 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep per DGG and Schmidt. (And don't be so bitey, please, Schuym1).
SIS15:39, 5 October 2008 (UTC)[reply] - Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. -- Fabrictramp | talk to me 18:04, 6 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep as per everyone but the nominator. Edward321 (talk) 00:46, 7 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment: So are they sources are out there keeps? Schuym1 (talk) 01:03, 7 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete - The article contains no claim to notability and independent investigation provided none. The term "alphapets" brings up a paltry 9000+ ghits (by comparison, "green eggs and ham bring up a half million) Few of the hits concerned this book. There appears to be another slightly more popular book out by completely different authors, a board game, resort and miscellaneous other companies. No notability from what I can see.--Esprit15d • talk • contribs 16:31, 7 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. Its existence in libraries does not confirm notability. No reliable sources are found. Karanacs (talk) 15:49, 8 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete – I don't believe the series is notable. PS: Schuym1, no one likes a user who makes harsh and uncivil replies whenever another user makes a comment they don't like. Tcrow777 Talk 01:01, 9 October 2008 (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.