Deletion of Is (novel)

Comment: per Tokyogirl79.  Most of the sources being used in the article are not about the novel at all, thus they obviously do nothing to establish notability of the subject.  And, as said, the one review is by a non-notable source and is alone not enough.  I don't see this meeting any of the criteria of 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:NBOOK)

Comment: First off,  is not a valid argument. Neither is . We don't keep books because it could potentially be helpful in one format or another to someone. You have to show that the book is notable by showing links to reliable sources. This leads me to the next point: Babbleabout Children's Books is not a reliable source. It's a book blog. It might be a bit bigger than some of the other blogs out there, but essentially it's a non-notable book blog and isn't usable to show notability for the book. Even if it was, it's one book review and we need multiple independent and reliable sources that talk about the book in-depth. So far there are no sources out there for this book  to show that it even slightly passes 
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions (WP:NOHARM||WP:ITSUSEFUL||WP:NBOOK)

Comment: I'd like to hear more about whether |notability criterion number four for books applies. ("The book is the subject of instruction at multiple grade schools, high schools, universities or post-graduate programs in any particular country
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:BKCRIT)