Deletion of A Tremor of Bliss

Comment: The nominator fails to present a policy-based argument and appears to be trying to make a |point against Sagecander. A momentary glance of the article’s references would tell anyone this meets |NBOOKS
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Do not disrupt Wikipedia to illustrate a point (WP:POINT||WP:NBOOKS)

Comment: has significant coverage in multiple reliable sources such a the Washington Times, Washington Post, Publishers Weekly, First Things, Intercept, Daily Caller, so easily passes . No valid reason for deletion except 
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG||WP:IDONTLIKEIT)

Comment: This book was reviewed when it was published in 2010, and did make one of ''Publisher's Weekly''{{'s}} lists, "Catholic" bestsellers.  It would not have passed  at that time.  But it came into the news during the Kavanaugh Supreme Court hearings and was discussed INDEPTH by major, mainstream media.  So it passes 
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:NBOOK||WP:SIGCOV)