Deletion of The Melting of Maggie Bean

Comment: Has been noticed and reviewed by multiple independent sources, thus passing . Good job, KittyRainbow
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:BK)

Comment: per  & the demonstrable lack of |notability per the |sources adduced above by
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:BK||WP:N||WP:RS)

Comment: Only 62 results from your dogpile search, and many of them are not directly related to this book.  Others are links to Amazon.com.  One scholarly review does not automatically make the book |notable. -&nbsp
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:BK)

Comment: this book fails  and as such does not merit inclusion
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:BK)

Comment: I've found the online copy of the School Library Journal review: http://www.schoollibraryjournal.com/article/CA6455686.html It has also been reviewed in http://www.ew.com/ew/article/0,,20033707,00.html Entertainment Weekly If you take "multiple" to mean "more than one" (which http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/multiple Dictionary.com does) then these alone mean it satisfies the "multiple, non-trivial, independent reliable sources" criteria set out in . There are also a couple of slightly less unimpeachable sources: http://www.teensreadtoo.com/MaggieBean.html Teens Read Too http://www.onebooktwobook.com/friday-fifteen-tricia-rayburn/ One Book Two Book Oh, and the current lack of an article on the author |shouldn't have a bearing on this discussion
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:BK||WP:OTHERSTUFF)