Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/An H. P. Lovecraft Encyclopedia

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. — Red-tailed hawk _(nest) 04:48, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

An H. P. Lovecraft Encyclopedia

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

• How to contribute
• Introduction to deletion process
• Guide to deletion (glossary)
• Help, my article got nominated for deletion!

An H. P. Lovecraft Encyclopedia (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)

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

Non-notable encyclopedia. --Viennese Waltz 07:18, 8 July 2024 (UTC)

Support: can't find any sources either Mrfoogles (talk) 08:23, 8 July 2024 (UTC)

Comment: created in 2006 with probably original research analysis, still unsourced (except to the book itself) today Mrfoogles (talk) 08:24, 8 July 2024 (UTC)

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:44, 8 July 2024 (UTC)

Keep. Several reviews on ProQuest: One in Library Journal (ProQuest ID 196790216), one in Choice magazine (PQ 225716546), possibly reviewed (I can't see if it's an actual review or just saying This Book Was Published, but it says it was a review) in College & Research Libraries News (PQ 203713400), full review in the New York Review of Science Fiction (PQ 2152382677). And that was just a light search on ProQuest, I would guess a few more if I was more thorough, but this is enough for GNG and NBOOK. PARAKANYAA (talk) 05:49, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

• Keep per the significant coverage in multiple independent reliable sources. Wikipedia:Notability (books)#Criteria says:

  A book is presumed notable if it verifiably meets, through reliable sources, at least one of the following criteria:

  1. The book has been the subject of two or more non-trivial published works appearing in sources that are independent of the book itself. This can include published works in all forms, such as newspaper articles, other books, television documentaries, bestseller lists, and reviews. This excludes media re-prints of press releases, flap copy, or other publications where the author, its publisher, agent, or other self-interested parties advertise or speak about the book.

  Sources
  1. The sources found by PARAKANYAA in Library Journal, Choice, College & Research Libraries News, and The New York Review of Science Fiction.
  There is sufficient coverage in reliable sources to allow An H. P. Lovecraft Encyclopedia to pass Wikipedia:Notability#General notability guideline, which requires "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject".

  Cunard (talk) 09:43, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

Keep. There are enough reliable sources proving notability.--SouthernNights (talk) 14:39, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

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.