This article is within the scope of WikiProject Novels, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to novels, novellas, novelettes and short stories on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and contribute to the general Project discussion to talk over new ideas and suggestions.NovelsWikipedia:WikiProject NovelsTemplate:WikiProject Novelsnovel articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Children's literature, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Children's literature on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Children's literatureWikipedia:WikiProject Children's literatureTemplate:WikiProject Children's literaturechildren and young adult literature articles
Destroying Avalon is within the scope of WikiProject Australia, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Australia and Australia-related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project page.AustraliaWikipedia:WikiProject AustraliaTemplate:WikiProject AustraliaAustralia articles
The previous deletion was made under claims of G7 and A7. This time the article obviously does not meet G7, and A7 doesn't apply to books. See WP:CSD. --Noiratsi (talk) 18:02, 6 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
You're right, A7 doesn't apply to books. Yet it did get deleted in an AFD, so I'm not sure which takes precedence here. Common sense suggests that deletion should be declined, but maybe we should let the reviewing admin decide: what do you think? Altered Walter (talk) 18:09, 6 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
To qualify for G4 the page has to be 'substantially identical to' or have the same problems as the original page. I don't think the previous deletion discussion put forward any arguments that would be valid for this page. I don't know if the article is notable or not, but I don't think the previous discussion discussed that in enough detail to be a useful reference. A new discussion might be useful, or we could just go hunting for sources. --Noiratsi (talk) 18:15, 6 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]