Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jacob's Ladder (Keaney 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 keep‎. Hey man im josh (talk) 17:28, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Jacob's Ladder (Keaney novel)

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

Fails WP:GNG tagged for notability for a decade. Won some non-notable awards. Questions? four Olifanofmrtennant (she/her) 15:45, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. Questions? four Olifanofmrtennant (she/her) 15:45, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. Reviewed in Bulletin of the Center for Children's Books, Kirkus. all are on ProQuest which is a WPL resource). Shorter review in Horn Book Guide. Don’t have the time on my hands rn to look further, sorry :(. If not notable, should redirect to the author. PARAKANYAA (talk) 23:44, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I looked at proquest this time and those didn't seem particularly indepth. Even then it wouldn't meet WP:THREE Questions? four Olifanofmrtennant (she/her) 01:53, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

NBOOK is two so WP:THREE doesn’t matter. Yes I haven’t had time to check, including newspapers or other book review sources, hence why I did not vote. Particularly in depth is not a requirement, merely that they be significant. I have not assessed this PARAKANYAA (talk) 02:06, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep I have added three reviews, more than satisfying WP:NBOOK. Certainly a paltry article, but not qualified for deletion. Οἶδα (talk) 06:44, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep thanks to the added reviews. Toughpigs (talk) 15:23, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: New sources are sufficient for NBOOK. ARandomName123 (talk)^{Ping me!} 20:08, 13 October 2024 (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.