Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/A House Interrupted

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. PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 00:53, 4 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A House Interrupted (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log • Stats)

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

Non notable book ,for which worldCat reports only 20 library holdings. The Psychology Today ref. is a citation, not a review, Everything else is PR based and unreliable for notability DGG ( talk ) 22:05, 26 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. ★☆ DUCKISJAMMMY☆★ 00:36, 27 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete Wasn't sure what was meant by "citation" above - If Psychology Today cited it as a source, that would be at least mildly impressive. But this is not in the magazine as far as I can tell, it's just a blog on the site, and it only mentions the book briefly as an aside. That's pretty much the definition of trivial coverage. The other references used for the article are either also trivial coverage, fail WP:RS rules, or both. A local listing that an author is doing a signing does nothing for establishing enough notability to be mentioned on Wikipedia, let alone have an article about the book. And there is no notability guideline hat gives anyone who makes an appearance on Dr. Drew or any other similar show worthy of an article here. DreamGuy (talk) 02:22, 27 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete The reference on CNN appear to be indirect and a one event and the only other sources are not WP:RS. --Artene50 (talk) 04:19, 27 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per DreamGuy. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 22:58, 2 July 2012 (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.