Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Joker in the pack

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

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. Hut 8.5 10:56, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Joker in the pack

Joker in the pack (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

If I can't get it at Amazon, then it's probably non-notable. Either way, I couldn't verify this article in light of the 30 unique ghits. (By the way, joker in the pack is a common idiom and makes verification especially hard.) MER-C 11:58, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

  • Weak Delete I can't find anything which says its notable. scope_creep (talk) 12:24, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
  • Comment The fact you can't get it in Amazon, doesn't assert any notability watsoever. Since Amazon by definition, is a western bookseller, and only sells a small percentage of the books published in the world, in an one particular year. I think it is less than 20%, is the figure I understand. Also taking into the fact that this is the English version of Wikipedia, has no bearing either. Taking into account USA and UK English speaking populations, account for less than 10% of English speakers world wide, means that there bunch of folk worldwide, publishing books in English, perhaps as secondary, or in some cases primary editions, which never make it to western publishing houses. We really need to get away from this western centric view we have if Wikipedia is to be a success. scope_creep (talk) 12:24, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep. The Management Compass ref in the article, plus this one from the 30 ghits would seem to satisfy WP:V and WP:RS Phil Bridger (talk) 14:20, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep per Phil Bridger. The book is covered by at least two reliable sources and despite what the nominator said, it is available on Amazon. Together with scope_creep's comment, that is enough to not pursue deletion. -Mgm|(talk) 15:23, 18 November 2007 (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.