Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Karveer Mahatmya
If this is a traditional religious scripture, then it almost certainly  is notable, and there should be sources.  Even if it was a very obscure manuscript before it was published in 2012, it is probably notable & there should still be sources. However, if it does consist of original stories about the Hindu saint, it may not be notable. A book of that sort needs significant reviews and other evidence of importance for notability -- see . Whether the newspaper articles will be sufficient is hard to say. Since the book was only published in 2012, some of the articles should be on line. I recognize the extreme difficulty in sourcing this type of material: India has no index of periodical literature or of book reviews, and no national online catalog. Our essay ystemic bias, though not policy, is generally observed here--what it means in this context is that we will often accept less    formal or extensive sourcing, for such topics. But we do need something
— User:DGG, 22:15, 10 February 2016 (UTC)
Stance: comment
Cited policy: WP:NBOOK||WP:S (Wikipedia:Notability)