Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Black Box (book)

This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was no consensus (default KEEP) — Gwalla | Talk 21:11, 5 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Black Box (book)

Reads like an advertisement on the back of a book jacket. Xcali 03:15, 25 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Keep and clean up. Kelly Martin 03:16, May 25, 2005 (UTC)
Keep and continue to clean up. Amazon sales rank #93,560 [1] Kappa 03:49, 25 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Keep and clean up. Reasonably notable book. Capitalistroadster 05:59, 25 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
As nearly as anyone can figure, an Amazon sales rank of roughly a hundred thousand means they've sold about 250 copies. Politely, delete. —Korath (Talk) 07:21, May 25, 2005 (UTC)
- Well it came out in 3 editions in the United States, probably at least one in Israel. Kappa 09:29, 25 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, low Amazon sales rankings... this isnt all that notable. Megan1967 07:36, 25 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Reads like jacket-blurb. Which would make it POV. If notable, then wants making objective and somewhat more rounded. IMHO --Simon Cursitor 07:45, 25 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. It's an awful article (what are "unconclusions"?) but this is a book by a very famous novelist and so should be cleaned up rather than deleted. --Zero 12:17, 25 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. The WP article on the author is quite good, but nothing in this article indicates that we have anything encyclopedic to say about this particular book. Even major authors produce minor works that don't require their own articles. If there is enough encyclopedic material to warrant on article on this book, starting from scratch would not be much of a burden because what's there now isn't worth saving. Quale 19:38, 25 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Keep The article is in bad shape but its still notable. Falphin 14:34, 26 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Delete non notable. JamesBurns 11:01, 27 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
ABSTAIN leaning hard to 'Keep' as good synopsis. What Is the Harm - 'and the Wikistandard' - the 'cost is but' a single record on a single track of the servers hdd. The greater Question is whether any book entry needs to be deemed notable and who decides. It seems to me that the Wikistandards about literary mentions should be more inclusionary than a printed bound encyclopedia, not limited solely because history hasn't made up it's mind about the merits of a contemporary author. Sales figures for Amazon are cited as a rationale, but I expect they exceed Amazon's sales for The Art of War, or indeed many other notable works like Uncle Tom's Cabin, Pilgrims Progress, Tom Sawyer, Little Women or the Uncle Remus (Tar Baby). Since stumbling across a reference like this in say a google search, might just get someone to put the computer aside and pick up a text long enough to exercise the old grey matter in the almost lost act of reading, bring such entries on. Wiki will then become famed for it's comprehensive and egalitarian nature, vice it's stuffy exclusionary snobbery. Fabartus 22:36, 30 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Keep and clean up, it's hard to imagine that any novel by Amos Oz would be non-notable. He is arguably Israel's leading novelist. -- Jmabel | Talk 05:51, Jun 5, 2005 (UTC)

This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.