Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Year We Seized the Day

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. (non-admin closure) Extraordinary Writ (talk) 18:25, 13 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The Year We Seized the Day[edit]

[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)

I am unable to find evidence of notability for this book. The excerpts from notable media are copy/pasted from the book's webpage and I am unable to independently verify their existence on the papers' sites. There is otherwise no indication of notability or reviews found to meet book notability criteria. Survived PROD due to a lack of deletion reason. Courtesy @Phil Bridger: Star Mississippi 18:02, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. Star Mississippi 18:02, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 18:14, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete I don't think WP:BKCRIT is satisfied for the article, fails WP:GNG. My search resulted in no sources that would count as a reliable source. Justi yaya 19:26, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Austlit lists multiple reviews [1]. duffbeerforme (talk) 19:36, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, meets WP:NBOOK with multiple reviews as brought out above. Coolabahapple (talk) 14:45, 9 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Nomination Withdrawn I'm not going to close it as there's a valid delete !vote, but I'm not sure how my search didn't turn up the Austlit reviews, which do establish notability. In the interim, going to add. Star Mississippi 16:05, 9 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, this should be kept for the reasons raised above, particularly the Austlitt reviews. Cabrils (talk) 02:13, 12 July 2021 (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.