Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Regionrat

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. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 03:29, 18 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Regionrat

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

Fails WP:NBOOK. Unsourced since creation. Prod contested in 2006, concern was "Spam/advertising. Judging by the creator's user-name, it's an ill-disguised attempt at self-promotion." Vrac (talk) 00:56, 11 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. lavender|^{(formerly HMSSolent)}|lambast 01:44, 11 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. lavender|^{(formerly HMSSolent)}|lambast 01:44, 11 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - nothing suggests that this presumably self-published book is notable.--Rpclod (talk) 04:51, 11 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

From what I can see, this isn't self-published since the publisher doesn't appear to be connected to the author. That's more of an aside, though. I'm finding little to show that this book is notable. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 08:48, 11 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: A longstanding WP:SPA article whose editor name is close to that of the book's author. Amazon has a review which looks to be a copy-paste of a short piece of at-publication local media coverage, but searches (Highbeam, Google) are turning up nothing to indicate that this meets WP:NBOOK or WP:GNG criteria. AllyD (talk) 06:18, 11 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. The only halfway decent mention I could find was in this journal article, which is only a brief passing mention via them quoting his book. That isn't enough to warrant the book having an article, so I'll have to go with a delete on this as well. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 08:51, 11 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Does not meet WP:NBOOK, have only been able to find these - [1] - a short university paper book review, [2] - The Region Rat: Folkloristic Contexts of People and Place, a discussion of the term, not the book. but happy for a redirect to Northwest Indiana, the region in question (maybe a section of the article can talk about the term, and mention the book?). Coolabahapple (talk) 21:29, 13 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment: I recommend caution with a redirect. Given the paucity of reference, nothing indicates that the subject name really is a notable nickname for the region. No reason for Wikipedia to support a neologism.--Rpclod (talk) 10:07, 14 July 2015 (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.