Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Boomer Bible: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
keep |
→The Boomer Bible: Closed as keep (XFDcloser) |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
<div class="boilerplate afd vfd xfd-closed" style="background-color: #F3F9FF; margin: 2em 0 0 0; padding: 0 10px 0 10px; border: 1px solid #AAAAAA;"> |
|||
| ⚫ | |||
:''The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's [[Help:Using talk pages|talk page]] or in a [[Wikipedia:Deletion review|deletion review]]). No further edits should be made to this page.'' |
|||
{{REMOVE THIS TEMPLATE WHEN CLOSING THIS AfD|M}} |
|||
<!--Template:Afd top |
|||
Note: If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to re-nominate an article for deletion, you must manually edit the AfD nomination links to create a new discussion page using the name format of [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PAGENAME (2nd nomination)]]. When you create the new discussion page, please provide a link to this old discussion in your nomination. --> |
|||
The result was '''keep'''. [[User:Yunshui|Yunshui]] [[User talk:Yunshui|<sup style="font-size:90%">雲</sup>]][[Special:Contributions/Yunshui|<sub style="font-size:90%">水</sub>]] 10:51, 4 December 2019 (UTC) |
|||
| ⚫ | |||
<noinclude>{{AFD help}}</noinclude> |
<noinclude>{{AFD help}}</noinclude> |
||
:{{la|The Boomer Bible}} – (<includeonly>[[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Boomer Bible|View AfD]]</includeonly><noinclude>[[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2019 November 26#{{anchorencode:The Boomer Bible}}|View log]]</noinclude>{{int:dot-separator}} <span class="plainlinks">[https://tools.wmflabs.org/jackbot/snottywong/cgi-bin/votecounter.cgi?page=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/The_Boomer_Bible Stats]</span>) |
:{{la|The Boomer Bible}} – (<includeonly>[[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Boomer Bible|View AfD]]</includeonly><noinclude>[[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2019 November 26#{{anchorencode:The Boomer Bible}}|View log]]</noinclude>{{int:dot-separator}} <span class="plainlinks">[https://tools.wmflabs.org/jackbot/snottywong/cgi-bin/votecounter.cgi?page=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/The_Boomer_Bible Stats]</span>) |
||
| Line 12: | Line 17: | ||
*'''Delete''' This reads more like advertising than an encyclopedia article.[[User:Johnpacklambert|John Pack Lambert]] ([[User talk:Johnpacklambert|talk]]) 00:57, 30 November 2019 (UTC) |
*'''Delete''' This reads more like advertising than an encyclopedia article.[[User:Johnpacklambert|John Pack Lambert]] ([[User talk:Johnpacklambert|talk]]) 00:57, 30 November 2019 (UTC) |
||
*'''Keep'''. The book has received reviews from ''[[Publishers Weekly]]'' ([https://www.publishersweekly.com/978-1-56305-075-6]), ''[[The Province]]'' ([https://search.proquest.com/docview/267434446/fulltext/B82FDE5DA4E0467DPQ/]), ''[[The Philadelphia Inquirer]]'' ([https://www.newspapers.com/clip/39785427/part_1_of_2/], [https://www.newspapers.com/clip/39785444/part_2_of_2]), ''[[Montreal Gazette]]'' ([https://www.newspapers.com/clip/39785474/boomer_bible_gazette_article/]), ''[[North County Times]]'' ([https://www.newspapers.com/clip/39785492/boomer_bible_north_county_times_part_1/]), and ''[[GayToday.com]]'' ([http://gaytoday.com/garchive/reviews/033098re.htm]). This meets [[WP:GNG]] and exceeds [[WP:NBOOK]] criteria #1, having multiple reviews in independent reliable sources. [[User:MarkZusab|MarkZusab]] ([[User talk:MarkZusab|talk]]) 00:35, 4 December 2019 (UTC) |
*'''Keep'''. The book has received reviews from ''[[Publishers Weekly]]'' ([https://www.publishersweekly.com/978-1-56305-075-6]), ''[[The Province]]'' ([https://search.proquest.com/docview/267434446/fulltext/B82FDE5DA4E0467DPQ/]), ''[[The Philadelphia Inquirer]]'' ([https://www.newspapers.com/clip/39785427/part_1_of_2/], [https://www.newspapers.com/clip/39785444/part_2_of_2]), ''[[Montreal Gazette]]'' ([https://www.newspapers.com/clip/39785474/boomer_bible_gazette_article/]), ''[[North County Times]]'' ([https://www.newspapers.com/clip/39785492/boomer_bible_north_county_times_part_1/]), and ''[[GayToday.com]]'' ([http://gaytoday.com/garchive/reviews/033098re.htm]). This meets [[WP:GNG]] and exceeds [[WP:NBOOK]] criteria #1, having multiple reviews in independent reliable sources. [[User:MarkZusab|MarkZusab]] ([[User talk:MarkZusab|talk]]) 00:35, 4 December 2019 (UTC) |
||
{{clear}} |
|||
:''The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. <b style="color:red">Please do not modify it.</b> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's [[Help:Using talk pages|talk page]] or in a [[Wikipedia:Deletion review|deletion review]]). No further edits should be made to this page.''<!--Template:Afd bottom--></div> |
|||
Latest revision as of 10:51, 4 December 2019
- 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. Yunshui 雲水 10:51, 4 December 2019 (UTC)
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
- The Boomer Bible (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Searches for references, citations or even mentions of the book on Google, WorldCat and JSTOR don't turn up significant coverage in independent, reliable sources and therefore I don't think this meets the general notability guideline. SITH (talk) 11:58, 26 November 2019 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. SITH (talk) 11:58, 26 November 2019 (UTC)
- Keep. Per WP:NBOOK two reviews is enough. The article already cites one: [1] Here's another review (quite negative, so clearly independent), visible via ProQuest: Crumm, David (December 22, 1991). "Boomer Bible is big bust". The Province. p. C16.
Along the way are thousands of Andrew Dice Clay-style jokes that seem determined to offend everyone about everything: Mexicans are called spics a lot; praying is called braying; a communion liturgy becomes a toast; and the opening line of Rock of Ages is recast as: "Rocks of cocaine, crushed for me, Let me wash my mind in thee." Are you laughing yet? Facing this mess could drive thousands of fallen-away Christians directly back to orthodoxy.
Haukur (talk) 08:20, 27 November 2019 (UTC) - Weak delete. Two reviews would be usually ok, but those reviews are on the very edge of what is reliable. Publisher's Weekly publishes reviews of a lot of books, and is not very picky. The other review is also very short (~300 words) and from The Province, "a daily tabloid newspaper published in British Columbia", a borderline quality source. So yes, two reviews, but of very borderline reliability. If someone can find a third one, maybe I'll change my vote, but for now, that's IMHO not enough. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 10:49, 29 November 2019 (UTC)
- Delete This reads more like advertising than an encyclopedia article.John Pack Lambert (talk) 00:57, 30 November 2019 (UTC)
- Keep. The book has received reviews from Publishers Weekly ([6]), The Province ([7]), The Philadelphia Inquirer ([8], [9]), Montreal Gazette ([10]), North County Times ([11]), and GayToday.com ([12]). This meets WP:GNG and exceeds WP:NBOOK criteria #1, having multiple reviews in independent reliable sources. MarkZusab (talk) 00:35, 4 December 2019 (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.