Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/A Paperboy's Fable

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 moot. Page creator has moved article back to draftspace to improve it. The Bushranger _{One ping only} 22:32, 25 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

A Paperboy's Fable

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

WP:TOOSOON. The book hasn't been published yet, and article is way too promotional. No independent sources at all, just routine listings. Grayfell (talk) 22:11, 25 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I understand. I misunderstood the "too soon" wikipedia rule. I do have a question about the sources, however. I improved many book wikipedia page and sources provided seem to be from a publisher. Is that not acceptable? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Editor2626744 (talk • contribs) 22:16, 25 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

It's sometimes (but not always) acceptable to use WP:PRIMARY sources to support content in articles, but they are not usable for establishing notability. See Wikipedia:Notability and Wikipedia:Notability (books). Since anybody can put out a website or create an account on websites like Amazon or Goodreads, these are not usable for this purpose, since Wikipedia isn't a platform for promotion. Nobody is denying that the book will probably be published eventually, but not every book or author, even ones published by notable publishing houses, is notable enough to have an article.

I want to be very clear on this: Even when the book is published it still may not be notable enough for an article. Reliable, independent sources will be needed. TOOSOON isn't a rule, it's just a useful shorthand way of explaining a common problem. Grayfell (talk) 22:26, 25 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I understand. Thank you for letting me know. I will let you know what I find in the future. Editor2626744 (talk) 22:26, 25 December 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.