Deletion of List of bagpipe books

Comment: as failing .  I think this has managed to exist for so long just due to being overlooked
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:NOTCATALOG)

Comment: as per . If it had some well-defined scope that was covered in sources (such as if there was an award for the best 20 Bagpipe books of all time, or bagpipe book of the year award), then and only then would it pass . Until then it's just a random list of any related book, which fails 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:NOTCATALOG||WP:NLIST||WP:NOTCATALOG)

Comment: as per 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:NOTCATALOG)

Comment: The |notability guideline for lists says that the items in the list should have been "discussed ''as a group or set'' by independent reliable sources".  This list does not cite any sources that discuss these books as a group or set. Indeed, the talk page contains a discussion about if the article needs a reference section or not, which concludes with, "I . . . don't understand why there's a "references" section when the whole article is a list of books."  They seem to have decided that the books serve as their own references, which so far as the title, author, publication info, and the fact that they are about bagpipes is concerned is true, but there is no evidence that NLIST is satisfied - that anyone before Wikipedia has treated these books as a set
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:NLIST)