Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The No-Nonsense Guide to Globalization

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 (no consensus). TigerShark 01:03, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] The No-Nonsense Guide to Globalization

• The No-Nonsense Guide to Globalization (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs)

This book doesn't look too notable to me. It's got an Amazon rank of 487,511, and a Google search for the title and author yields 505 hits from booksellers, libraries and such. Mostly, the article reads like an advertisement, and the synopsis is a copyvio from Amazon.com, of which WP:NOT a mirror. Contested PROD. Sandstein 12:01, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

• Delete per nom. MER-C 12:08, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
• Keep. According to the article it's written by a notable person (see lead). Remove the copyvio synopsis. Sales are less relevant when the author is notable. - Mgm|^(talk) 13:00, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

• Hmm. Is he? Not to say he isn't, but there's no article on Wayne Ellwood, and I'm not quite sure that a book is notable just because the editor of the New Internationalist wrote it. Maybe if we can find some book reviews in reliable sources, per the proposed WP:BK. Sandstein 13:58, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

• Delete per nom as it pretty much says it all. According to the article it's written by a notable person (see lead). yeah let's use the article itself to establish notability. No seriously... we need more proof here and if you remove the copyvio there really isn't much left to begin with anyways. MartinDK 14:07, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
• Keep the author is the editor of a well-known magazine, even if he doesn't yet have a wikipedia entry. Lack of a wikipedia entry is not evidence of lack of notability. Lurker ^oi! 16:09, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

Merge per Bwithh Lurker ^oi! 13:36, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

• Strong Merge as cut-down mention in new stub The No-Nonsense Guide to... This yet another iteration of the commercial academic publisher's device of a series of short summary guides to serious academic or current affairs topics aimed at people who don't want to do heavy reading (especially lazy students) - see 20 or so books listed in the No-Nonsense series with different authors on Amazon[1] . At least in the UK, this trend seems to have taken off in the 1990s, the formula being inspired by the classic 1975 book Marx for Beginners by the Mexican cartoonist, Rius (This 1975 work was not created as part of a planned series but was quite an original concept: cartoon Marxist theory with comedy moments aimed at educating the masses). Scores, perhaps hundreds if you include the imitator series spawned, of "... for Beginners" books followed[2] with increasingly uneven quality and content. The No-Nonsense series seems to be pretty respectable, but the editorial process would have worked with the series editor commissioning an expert author to write a particular book of the series, and not by the author submitting an original concept manuscript to the publisher. Such books are also typically intended to give overviews of the field rather than original arguments (the author would do well to to save that for a book which is not part of a "beginners" series). So, the No-Nonsense series may warrant an article here (compare the articles for ...For_Dummies and The Complete Idiot's Guide to...), but we don't need an article on every book in the No-nonsense series (a commercially published book is not automatically encyclopedically notable) just as we don't for every one of the ...For Dummies series. IF the author may be somewhat notable in his own right, then create an article for him. Bwithh 18:37, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

Yes, this makes sense, and part of your comment would make a good beginning for that stub. I wouldn't object to a merge there. Sandstein 20:13, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

• Strong keep, non-vanity book by noted author from a non-vanity press. --badlydrawnjeff talk 16:58, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
• Delete or Merge w/ Author. Not notable. --Improv 18:11, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
• Comment (negative) - The publisher Verso Books may be notable enough for a Wikipedia article, but a claim of notability cannot be made for the author just because their employer is notable enough for one. —72.75.93.131 (talk • contribs) 13:59, 25 November 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.