Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Big Nate Goes for Broke
While the sourcing isn't as strong as I'd like it to be, it is enough for this to barely squeak by notability guidelines right now. I will acknowledge that the review from the Daily Record is insanely short, but it does technically count as a review- there's been no true consensus on review length to date, so summary-heavy reviews like this one are still usable. It did reach the NYT bestseller list and while that's not currently something that counts towards notability per , there are Wikipedia_talk:Notability_(books)#Bestsellers_as_an_indication_of_notability|moves to get that changed to where this can be considered something that would help show notability. (Bringing this up partially in hopes of getting a wider consensus there.) However, I also wouldn't object to it redirecting to the main series page either
— User:Tokyogirl79, 09:51, 7 June 2015 (UTC)
Stance: keep
Cited policy: WP:NBOOK (Wikipedia:Notability)