Deletion of The Return To Gibraltar (science fiction novel)

Comment: per nom, fails , sources generally fail 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:NBOOK||WP:RS)

Comment: fails the 5 criteria listed in , lack of independent reliable sources.--Special:Contributions/70.80.234.163|70.80.234.163
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:BK)

Comment: fails . The special pleading above is... unconvincing to say the least
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:BK)

Comment: Subject does not meet .  Virtually no reliable sources
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:N)

Comment: this AfD was closed after the author of the article blanked it and it was deleted per #G7. He then re-created the article under a different title (The Return to Gibraltar), so I have moved it back to the original title and reopened the AfD
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion (WP:CSD)

Comment: I am unable to find any acceptable sources on Google platforms, nor with an alternate database search. Fails  across the board, and sources appear to fail . Wikipedia is not in the business of promotion or original research  and #OR, nor is it an indiscriminate collection of information . Accusations in this thread pertaining to racism etc., are specious, without merit and have no relevance on the determination of inclusion. In fact, reliable sources would have to say that rascism is relevant or even related for it to be considered
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:BK||WP:RS||WP:PROMO||WP:NOT||WP:N)

Comment: Fails 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:BK)

Comment: non-notable according to . Also lack of independent reliable sources
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:BK)