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. (non-admin closure) CAPTAIN RAJU (✉) 16:47, 18 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Insect Dreams: The Half Life of Gregor Samsa

[edit]

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

Article does not appear to meet Wikipedia:Notability (books). SamsaK (talk) 20:41, 11 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 20:53, 11 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (✉) 21:22, 11 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: Per these reviews - Pakn Treger , Blogcritics, Library Journal, New York Times, and Chicago Tribune. There is also this analysis and this analysis. It was also featured in a scholarly article about insects in dreams. There is much more available with just searching the name itself in Google. Did you follow WP:BEFORE? SL93 (talk) 22:04, 11 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per SL93. Passes WP:NBOOK with flying colors. The nominator has only been around for two weeks, so we can forgive them if they misapplied the notability policy. Altamel (talk) 22:58, 11 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Keep – Meets WP:BOOKCRIT per a source review. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 03:32, 12 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as a notable book as shown by notable sources. Hyperbolick (talk) 15:24, 12 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Keep – Clearly passes GNG and NBOOK, as shown by reviews found by SL93. J 947^{^{^(c)}} 06:46, 13 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Why was this article nominated for deletion. It meets GNG, WP:BOOKCRIT and NBOOK. And as SL93 indicated: "Per these reviews - Pakn Treger , Blogcritics, Library Journal, New York Times, and Chicago Tribune. There is also this analysis and this analysis. It was also featured in a scholarly article about insects in dreams. There is much more available with just searching the name itself in Google. Did you follow WP:BEFORE?" This AfD reminded me that I would like to read Kafka again and intend on doing so.Dean Esmay (talk) 02:46, 15 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
The nominator is a newcomer; they probably just made the mistake of conflating "this article does not cite any sources" with "this article is not notable." Altamel (talk) 05:29, 15 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
keep it meets It meets GNG, WP:BOOKCRIT and NBOOK, so I see no reason to delete--Kostas20142 (talk) 14:04, 18 April 2017 (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.