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. Mark Arsten (talk) 03:26, 26 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Annus Horribilis Project[edit]

The Annus Horribilis Project (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)

Apparently unremarkable arts project - aim is to compile a book based on public submissions with no publication date set yet (despite project starting in 2007). Mostly sourced to project's own publicity material. Would be likely candidate for speedy deletion except there is some press sourcing. TheGrappler (talk) 04:12, 19 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. A search for any variation of the title doesn't bring up any signs of notability for this project, finished or not. This is ultimately an overly promotional page for a project that never seems to have gotten off the ground. There is zero notability here. I'd almost suggest a redirect to the artist's page, but it looks like he's having notability issues as well.Tokyogirl79 (talk) 09:34, 19 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Having checked author's contributions: turns out that this was originally made at Article for Creation, and declined as a potential speedy deletion candidate. I would have speedied except for the offline reference which I took as an assertion of notability (albeit one I disagree with). TheGrappler (talk) 15:50, 19 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:50, 20 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. Non-notable, only substantive edits are by a single editor who has contributed to no other articles. That may not be a formal cause for deletion, but it smacks of WP:PROMO and probably WP:COI. Dave.Dunford (talk) 11:05, 20 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as WP:SPAM. Qworty (talk) 20:24, 24 August 2012 (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.