Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Monster (Kellerman novel)

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 speedy keep. Nomination withdrawn. Jeepday (talk) 14:48, 12 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Monster (Kellerman novel)

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

Fails at WP:RS. I've been trying to look for additional citations and been unable to find any. JayzBox (talk) 20:00, 6 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 20:23, 6 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. I did some digging and found newspaper coverage in Newspapers.com - @JayzBox: if you don't have a subscription to this site, you can request this here. It's pretty handy, although you do have to sometimes wade through a ton of false positives when there are relatively common terms. (Like Monster, which brought up a ton of random things until I started limiting the search fields more and more.) ReaderofthePack(formerly Tokyogirl79) (｡◕‿◕｡) 12:48, 7 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- @ReaderofthePack:, thank you for your response and for suggesting me to use Wikipedia:Newspapers.com (of which I wasn't aware existed). My perspective has greatly changed regarding this article (I've decided to withdraw). I see myself using Newspapers.com in a nearby future if the information I'm looking can't be found in either Google Books (via Scholar), or Google News. Regards. JayzBox (talk) 23:15, 7 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Google Books is good, but it feels like their offerings have gotten a little weaker lately, as more and more things seem to be hidden behind paywalls. This might be due to publishers fighting against the preview option, which isn't a new phenomenon with GB unfortunately. ReaderofthePack(formerly Tokyogirl79) (｡◕‿◕｡) 03:30, 9 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I’ve definitely noticed that, but I can’t complain since if I were in their shoes I would’ve completely understand and most likely done about the same. Local libraries really come in handy since they always have a variety of subjects, with the perk being they’re free to view. JayzBox (talk) 16:54, 9 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Withdraw. per ReaderofthePack. JayzBox (talk) 23:18, 7 May 2021 (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.