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. -- Cirt (talk) 00:16, 28 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Panic (novel) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log • AfD statistics)

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

Delete. Contested PROD but non-notable per WP:BK. -- Alan Liefting (talk) - 23:04, 20 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. -- Marcus Qwertyus 23:32, 20 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep Evidently notable per WP:BK. Nomination seems to be part of disruptive deletion spree contrary to deletion policy. Colonel Warden (talk) 05:52, 21 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep Notability established by numerous reliable sources. This is one of a series of lazy, weak, and disruptive WP:Not notable nominations. Please do not nominate articles for deletion en masse without research. It is a waste of many editors' time. Vodello (talk) 16:25, 21 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Is it primarily a waste of my time since i'm the one working to improve all of them? :P Though I suppose it is sort of good time because of that, not that AfD should be used as an article-improvement center. Silverseren^C 16:42, 21 October 2010 (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.