Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rupert's Big Move

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. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 05:56, 9 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Rupert's Big Move

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

~~Fails WP:NBOOK. John Jaffar Janardan (talk) 03:31, 24 August 2016 (UTC)~~ striking confirmed sockpuppet Atlantic306 (talk) 02:58, 28 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 17:01, 25 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Borderline speedy candidate as solely promotional. Jclemens (talk) 18:01, 25 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This is not solely promotional, but rather simply informative, none the difference in Wolves of Calla. I enjoyed the book and thought both author and book could be added to Wikipedia. Obviously I am new here and apparently have missed a few correct places to link to. For that I am sorry. I am not the author, just a reader who thought this book and author could be included. Caninelobo — Preceding unsigned comment added by 199.68.225.66 (talk) 02:30, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Yellow Dingo (talk) 07:22, 1 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. I removed the claims of it being submitted for the Caldecott and Newbery Medal - the thing about those awards is that it's not hard to submit something for consideration for those, as just about anyone can do that if they have access. It's not the same thing as when you have an award where the only way to be selected is via a committee that specifically looks for nominees. In any case that's a bit moot since only wins give notability on Wikipedia. A search brought up nothing to show that this book passes notability guidelines at all. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 07:54, 8 September 2016 (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.