Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Motel on Murder Mountain

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. Geschichte (talk) 20:49, 23 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Motel on Murder Mountain

[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 multiple reliable sources discussing this book per WP:GNG / WP:NBOOK. ... discospinster _talk 19:43, 8 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. ... discospinster _talk 19:43, 8 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. ... discospinster _talk 19:43, 8 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This book Motel on Murder Mountain is significant to the weird menace sub-genre, and it's revival. I created the page to shine a new light on an extinct genre. This book has been mentioned in multiple articles and listings as I have mentioned in the sources section and references section. Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by GreyGhost1313 (talk • contribs) 15:11, November 8, 2020 (UTC)

I'm moving this over from the AfD's talk page. I also want to note that I blocked the account as being for promotion only - there is more info on the user's talk page. Since I blocked the user I won't make a formal argument for or against deletion, however I will note that the sources are either unusable (Wikipedia), are Goodreads listings or forum posts created by the novella author (database, primary), books written by the novella author (primary), or do not mention the author or novella at all (ie, cannot establish notability and could be original research if used for anything about the book in specific). This will need coverage in independent and reliable sources if notability is to be proven. ReaderofthePack(formerly Tokyogirl79) (｡◕‿◕｡) 11:03, 11 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This is covering a notable title that is new to the market and is attempting to revive the Weird Menace sub-genre. There is several articles written about the audiobook as well as the paperback with more high level mentions coming, they will be added soon. This was created for the better of the genre. — Preceding unsigned comment added by GreyGhost1313 (talk • contribs) 18:36, November 9, 2020 (UTC)

Moved this one down as well from the top of the page. Note: if this is deleted as a soft delete I'd recommend admins request proof of notability beforehand, otherwise it may be an easy target for further deletion. ReaderofthePack(formerly Tokyogirl79) (｡◕‿◕｡) 11:05, 11 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Spartaz ^Humbug! 22:00, 16 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - A self-published book whose Wikipedia article was created by the author. Not a single one of the sources included is actually viable - they are either from non-reliable sources or do not mention the book at all. Searching for additional sources turns up absolutely nothing. Rorshacma (talk) 00:34, 17 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete the coverage I have found doesn't qualify as IRS - only user generated and connected to the subject (and mainly amazon and bookreads). It's a WP:GNG no for me. Less Unless (talk) 07:40, 19 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete since the subject fails all criteria for notability. The references already cited are just more books by the same author, the epitome of a pefectly cyclical argument. More sources are harder to find than water on the sun. This is just one more episode in the never ending series of using Wikipedia as a promotional platform. -The Gnome (talk) 14:03, 23 November 2020 (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.