Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Friends of a Feather

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. 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 19:00, 23 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Friends of a Feather[edit]

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

PROD removed by page's creator. Non-notable book lacking significant coverage in reliable sources. Meatsgains^(talk) 03:09, 16 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. The subject is non-notable. All of these eyeball children's books should probably be deleted. Centibyte ^(talk) 03:13, 16 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk • mail) 04:26, 16 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Almost completely devoid of content, and no evidence whatsoever of notability. JoJo Anthrax (talk) 18:08, 16 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete non-notable book. Seems to be part of a push to put the non-notable works of a non-notable author into Wikipedia. Fails GNG and BOOK. Jbh ^Talk 06:10, 17 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Fails WP:NBOOK.E.M.Gregory (talk) 18:27, 21 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, does not meet WP:NBOOK or WP:GNG, WorldCat shows libraries' holdings of around 110 mostly throughout the USA only, a gsearch brings up nothing useable, just bookseller/publisher/personal blog sites. Coolabahapple (talk) 08:13, 22 February 2018 (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.