Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Maximum Diner

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. The Blade of the Northern Lights (話して下さい) 17:55, 23 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Maximum Diner

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I was able to find only a single review of this book. Granted, it's a reliable one in a major newspaper, but we generally require multiple sources, and I couldn't find even a blog review to get said multiplies. Can anyone help and find few more reviews? Otherwise this fails Wikipedia:Notability (books) I am afraid, and I can't even think for a good target for merge/redirect. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 14:27, 9 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. ^{Babymissfortune} 14:54, 9 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Food and drink-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 04:10, 13 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 04:10, 13 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Yunshui ^雲 _水 10:39, 16 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete I too found what seems to be the only review for this book. I found some passing mentions here and there, but not enough to sartisfy WP:SIGCOV. While it sounds like an entertaining read, I fear it does fail WP:BK as noted by the nominator. An article curiously languishing with only 29 edits since its creation 12 years ago. Perhaps the lack of notability explains. Geoff | ^{Who, me?} 18:34, 18 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. No additional reviews in my usual searches. Not finding pull quotes to track from reviewers either. Lacks significant coverage in multiple reliable, independent sources. (?) czar 01:28, 21 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.