Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Penguin Anthology of Stories by Canadian Women

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. While most of the authors in the book are notable, the anthology itself is not a notable subject per Wikipedia's notability guidelines for books. Consensus is to delete. Malinaccier (talk) 02:09, 24 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The Penguin Anthology of Stories by Canadian Women

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

Non-notable book. Almost all of the authors are notable, but the book itself is not. (For example, "Penguin Anthology of Stories by Canadian Women" gets only 53 Google hits.) Notability of the book is not asserted in the article, and the only reference provided is a self-reference. Bueller 007 (talk) 20:47, 9 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 21:21, 9 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 21:21, 9 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 21:09, 11 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Mr. Guye (talk) (contribs) 06:31, 16 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Anthologies aren't automatically deemed notable just because they happen to have notable authors in them — they still have to clear WP:NBOOK just the same way as any other book, namely by having reliable source coverage about them, such as book reviews in reliable publications. But that's something that an anthology which merely repackages short stories which were already previously published in the authors' own books, rather than comprising original material written for the anthology itself, is relatively unlikely to actually have. The only "reference" here, however, is the book's own publication details — but you do not make a book notable enough for a Wikipedia article by metasourcing it to itself, either. Bearcat (talk) 03:32, 17 December 2017 (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.