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. v/r - T P 15:10, 10 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Strong at the Heart

[edit]

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

Does not assert notability. The book doesn't seem to be in print any more (Amazon only lists used copies) and the webpage we link to was last updated in 2005. I was not able to find any meaningful coverage through Google Books and Google Scholar. Matt Deres (talk) 21:42, 27 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. — • Gene93k (talk) 02:35, 28 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

NOTE: This is the second AFD for this article. The previous AFD was at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Strong at the Heart: How it feels to heal from sexual abuse. The article was moved and the AFD record in the discussion page pointed to the wrong place as a result of the move. -- Whpq (talk) 16:19, 29 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for pointing that out. I saw the redlink to the deletion discussion, but didn't really twig to what had happened. Matt Deres (talk) 20:14, 30 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. There is a review at doi:10.1353/bcc.2006.0012, but I don't know how extensive it is, except that it doesn't go over more than one page. Phil Bridger (talk) 10:19, 1 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:16, 3 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete lots of notable books are out of print--being continuously in print is a strong sign of notability for a book, but the reverse isn't always true. That said, I'm not seeing any evidence this particular book is notable by any other measure either. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 01:59, 5 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete fails WP:GNG Stuartyeates (talk) 09:50, 7 September 2011 (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.