Deletion of Reasons To Vote For Democrats

Comment: The book received significant coverage in the Business Insider article, passes 
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG)

Comment: Not all of the sources mentioned above are useful, however I absolutely do see coverage of the book's inception, critical commentary on its publication, and even direct reporting on its reception. It would be completely feasible to write a succinct encyclopedia article on this topic (if not at length) based on Wikipedia:Verifiability#Reliable sources|reliable, secondary sources. I see the |general notability guideline totally satisfied in E.M.Gregory's first few links. Nom, what matters here is that the "silly little joke" received |significant coverage
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG||WP:SIGCOV)

Comment: Yes -- there was quite a lot of coverage for this book. Once. I'm essentially arguing that this is . At the moment the media is regurgitating anything and everything that President Trump says on Twitter, but is that evidence of sustained interest? A Trump tweet is effectively an |event at this point. Perhaps if this book is still being written about six months or a year from now then that will be evidence of  coverage that would warrant inclusion per otability
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Too soon (WP:TOOSOON||WP:EVENT||WP:SUSTAINED||WP:N)

Comment: this shouldn't be considered under ; it's a joke, not a written work. The only case for notability is  news coverage of "Trump posted about it on Twitter", which is not sufficient
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:NBOOK||WP:MILL)

Comment: Because there is, in fact,  in these Washington Post articles: ''‘Reasons to Vote for Democrats’ jumps to the top of Amazon’s bestseller list. But its pages are blank.'', https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2017/03/10/reasons-to-vote-for-democrats-jumps-to-the-top-of-amazons-bestseller-list-but-its-pages-are-blank/?utm_term=.39fd482e0a57, and, ''An author praised Trump on ‘Fox & Friends.’ Hours later, his book had a presidential endorsement.'' https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2017/03/15/how-bad-are-things-for-democrats-a-blank-book-mocking-them-is-amazons-top-seller/?utm_term=.3f1120d66c49. New York Daily News, ''Blank book called ‘Reasons to vote for Democrats’ top seller on Amazon'', http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/mar/8/blank-book-reasons-vote-democrats-top-seller/, and quite a few more that go into surprising depth considering that this was a book of blank pages.   Like this Weekly Standard article by Roger Kimball, ''Shooting Blanks,'' http://www.weeklystandard.com/shooting-blanks/article/2007554.  There are also articles crediting this with spawning imitators, and articles about one of the imitators, ''The History of the Palestinian People: From Ancient Times to the Modern Era'', featuring "132 blank pages" being removed from Amazon after commentators on the site objected.   Okay, so: Q. How many Democrats does it take to change a light bulb?  A. That's not funny
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:SIGCOV)

Comment: Easily passes  and the book specific (1). Major coverage of this book exists, beyond what is reffed in the article as a simple BEFORE shows. Old joke or not, it is notable due to coverage, RSes find this notable, so should we
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG||WP:NBOOK)