Deletion of Solstice at Panipat, 14 January 1761

Comment: One review isn't sufficient to meet our criteria at either  or Wikipedia:Notability (books) (and of course we haven't yet been told what it says. A comment by the author doesn't go to the notability of the book
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG)

Comment: As EEng has eloquently explained, there are plenty of supporters for the topic of the article, yet evidence for  remains elusive. The article fails BOOK—no multiple independent non-trivial reviews on the ''subject'', no literary award, no significant contribution, not used for education, and non-notable author
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:N||WP:NBOOK)

Comment: Why not redirect? After all |they are cheap. This article can be redirected to Battle of Panipat (1761). {{small|(I am gonna do that on almost all AfDs now
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Redirects are cheap (WP:CHEAP)

Comment: because the book fails  due to lack of in-depth reviews or other significant coverage in reliable independent sources (plural). There have been poor arguments advanced on both sides of this debate. Despite my respect for Sitush and that editor's outstanding work to maintain high standards on articles pertaining to India, there is no requirement that a book be written by an "academic" rather than an "amateur historian" in order to be notable enough for a Wikipedia article. Books widely considered garbage by serious scholars can be notable and the subject of Wikipedia articles. Chariots of the Gods? is just the first of many examples that come to mind. Mein Kampf also comes to mind, painfully. The test is whether the book has received significant coverage in several reliable, independent sources. We have only one review of this book in another language and don't really know what it says. I readily accept coverage in reliable sources in other languages as part of establishing notability, but a single vague source that no one here can yet characterize accurately is insufficient. We have passing mentions in English that don't provide significant coverage and must therefore be disregarded. I endorse the conclusions of EEng and Johnuniq. Let's end this and delete this article. Editors interested in improving our coverage of Indian topics should write articles about those other notable books about India mentioned above that don't yet have Wikipedia articles and should
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:NBOOK)