Deletion of A Fair Cop

Comment: For now at least -  meets criteria 1  (Google search) - however, the page does need more work and many more references from Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources|reliable sources. Book has been used for Adult Learners' Week so nearly (but not quite) meeting criteria 4 of . I would say give it a reprieve for the time being and give interested editors time to address the pages' failings
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:NBOOKS||WP:NBOOKS)

Comment: Doesn't appear to meet any of the five criteria of 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:NBOOKS)

Comment: The book has not received the necessary |significant coverage from independent reliable sources. A search at http://www.google.com/search?client=safari&rls=en&q=%22A+Fair+Cop%22&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8#hl=en&client=safari&rls=en&tbs=ar:1&tbm=nws&sclient=psy-ab&q=%22A+Fair+Cop%22+bunting&oq=%22A+Fair+Cop%22+bunting&gs_l=serp.3...10199.11804.1.12015.8.8.0.0.0.0.160.950.3j5.8.0...0.0...1c.1.X4n6rvHj_Io&pbx=1&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.r_qf.&fp=c5f8586ec6d2eddf&biw=980&bih=693 Google News finds minor coverage in minor publications, with the single exception of an article in the Yorkshire Evening Post. Both the Wikipedia article and the book (and even the book's title) are blatant examples of special pleading, telling one side of the story - what I call "ain't it awful" reporting. The article should be made more neutral if it is kept, but IMO it should not be kept because it fails Wikipedia:Notability (books
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:The answer to life, the universe, and everything (WP:42)