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. Unanimous consensus to delete, other than some obvious socking. -- RoySmith (talk) 00:21, 14 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The Powers of the Earth[edit]

The Powers of the Earth (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

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

Fails WP:NBOOK criteria. No evidence of significant critical coverage and has only been nominated for an award, not won it. PROD removed by article creator without rationale. RA0808 ^talk_contribs 23:06, 6 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Science fiction-related deletion discussions. RA0808 ^talk_contribs 23:07, 6 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. RA0808 ^talk_contribs 23:07, 6 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nominator....William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 10:56, 7 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - there are other books with less distribution than this one that are listed in Wikipedia. It's nomination to the Prometheus awards does represent that it is notable as Prometheus is well regarded in the Libertarian community — Preceding unsigned comment added by 47.196.69.45 (talk) 14:31, 7 April 2018 (UTC) — 47.196.69.45 (talk) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]
• Keep - There are many uncontested articles for books with fewer sales. Opposition here seems like political hit job. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2605:E000:151E:80EA:2546:F041:87E7:7A53 (talk) 15:25, 7 April 2018 (UTC) — 2605:E000:151E:80EA:2546:F041:87E7:7A53 (talk) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]
  • Please note that accusing other editors of a "political hit job" is not in line with WP:NPA. Comment on content, not on fellow contributors. RA0808 ^talk_contribs 17:25, 7 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete without prejudice. Non-notable novel by non-notable author. If it wins the Prometheus, or gets attention outside the insular world of ultra-libertarian SF fans, then a new article with actual references and footnotes could be created. --Orange Mike | Talk 19:36, 7 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete no reviews or RS in this article, if it wins the award, it could substantiate it. Deathlibrarian (talk) 02:33, 8 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - There are many uncontested articles for books with fewer sales, and the overwhelming majority of other Prometheus Award finalists, per the Award page, have entries. - Loweeel (talk) 15:34, 9 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Non notable book, other keep arguments offer no arguments towards its notability, only admitting it's non notable and claiming others are equally as non-notable. In that case, those articles should be deleted too._{ZXCVBNM (TALK)} 19:51, 11 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Once the Prometheus Award nominations come and go, then we'll see. But right now, the book is not proven to be independently notable. The publishing company is red-linked, and, most glaringly, there are no citations! And other than the mention of the Prometheus Award, the article does not attempt to explain the book's notability aside from this aspect about it.

PS: the supplied link to Morlock Publishing is a twitter account and not an official website. This is a quite insufficient link for an institution with supposedly Wiki-notable output. Mungo Kitsch (talk) 06:39, 13 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

See my comments on Morlock at the related Afd: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Travis J I Corcoran.E.M.Gregory (talk) 14:29, 13 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete fails WP:NBOOK.E.M.Gregory (talk) 14:27, 13 April 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.