Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Mark of Conte

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 keep. - Mailer Diablo 04:23, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] The Mark of Conte

This is an insignificant book. The Jade Knight 03:52, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

• Weak keep, the book was published by a notable publisher (Aladdin, which is a division of Simon & Schuster). Also, it won two awards (Southern California Council on Literature for Children and Young People Award for Best Fiction) and it was nominated for another (California Young Reader Medal). [1]--TBCTaLk?!? 04:13, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Will it be possible to get any information on the book from secondary sources (other than her own website) to expand it beyond stub size? I am doubtful, myself. The Jade Knight 04:23, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
• Merge to authors page.--Peta 06:08, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
• Very Strong Keep If you are going to nominate a book for deletion, then please go down to the library and do some real research. It's irritating when I see people nominate a book off of just doing a quick Google search, looking at the Ghit number and basing their entire AFD on it. There are many other sources for research that are just as powerful as the net, and just as accepted for sources. While I agree that all articles need to be verifiable, The book was published by a notable publisher and did win the awards noted (which a quick check at the local library can confirm). But since it is fairly obvious that would be too much work for some people here, I'll stick to their preferred (and inherently flawed) researching tool.

Nominated for the 1982 California Young Reader Medal

of Southern Mississippi has confirmed that it won the southern california council on literature for children and young people award (G-cached site)

If we look at [guidelines for books] we see this

Nonetheless there is no dictum against any book that is reasonably spread or otherwise well-known or remarkable. Ask yourself if several libraries or bookshops, or a no-subscription website have a copy of the book, so that other wikipedians can easily consult the book, or at least have access to on-line or press-published reviews of the book.

Remember this book was published in the 1970's...way before the internet, hence press-reviews online will be scarce. Not many Ghits for "The Mark of Conte" but it is a 70's printed book and this does pass because of it's awards and wide spread among libraries around the world. Looking online though shows MANY libraries have a copy of this book. The first Google page has the Boston Public library and the Juneau Public Library (that's a spread...Boston, NY and Juneau, AK). The next page has the Cairo American College, in Cairo Egypt listing the book on their shelves, as well as the Wheaton Public Library (wheaton, IL), City of Tempe Public Library (Tempe, AZ),Logan Public Library (Logan UT) and a listing by the The Missouri State Library and Nassau Library System (Nassau, NY). A search of the ODIN database for the Tri-State area of North Dakota, Minnesota, South Dakota found that 52 libraries in those states carried the book. I think that proves this is a keep. --Brian ^{(How am I doing?)} 06:24, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

• Strong keep. The publisher and the noted awards are enough for me to dispell the nomination, but I commend Brian for some solid research. - Mgm|^(talk) 09:48, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
• Strong Keep - Brian has done excellent work establishing the notability of the book. Badbilltucker 17:48, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

• Keep per previous. - CNichols 21:19, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
• Clearly the book is fairly widespread, but my reasoning was that I doubt that this article will ever expand beyond its current stub size. I still think a merge would be more appropriate—Wikipedia is supposed to be a tertiary source. Can anyone find secondary sources on this book? The Jade Knight 21:28, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

The links Brian provided are secondary... - Mgm|^(talk) 21:37, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

Beat me too it, MacGyver. :). Side note, did you know that Richard Dean Anderson has a home in Cass Lake, MN (right on the lake). Met him a few times...really great guy! --Brian ^{(How am I doing?)} 21:45, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

That source (sing.) is secondary, but contains no more information on the book than is currently in the stub—my point is that the article is unlikely to grow, and would be better off merged with Sonia Levitin. The Jade Knight 01:14, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

• Keep per Brian. WP:OSTRICH nomination per JadeKnight's reply to TBC. Just because it isn't on Google doesn't mean that it doesn't exist. Angus McLellan (Talk) 10:49, 15 September 2006 (UTC)
• Strong keep per above. Aladdin is a very well known publisher. --badlydrawnjeff talk 10:58, 15 September 2006 (UTC)
• Keep per above comments, talk to the WP:OSTRICH. RFerreira 22:39, 15 September 2006 (UTC)
• 'Keep passes the proposed WP:BK guideline easily. Pascal.Tesson 20:55, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

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.