Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Literature

Shortcuts

This is a collection of discussions on the deletion of articles related to Literature. It is one of many deletion lists coordinated by WikiProject Deletion sorting. Anyone can help maintain the list on this page.

Adding a new AfD discussion

Adding an AfD to this page does not add it to the main page at WP:AFD. Similarly, removing an AfD from this page does not remove it from the main page at WP:AFD. If you want to nominate an article for deletion, go through the process on that page before adding it to this page. To add a discussion to this page, follow these steps:

Edit this page and add {{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PageName}} to the top of the list. Replace "PageName" with the relevant article name, i.e. the one on the existing AFD discussion. Also, indicate the title of the article in the edit summary as it is particularly helpful to add a link to the article in the edit summary. When you save the page, the discussion will automatically appear.
You should also tag the AfD by adding {{subst:delsort|Literature|~~~~}} to it, which will inform editors that it has been listed here. You may place this tag above or below the nomination statement or at the end of the discussion thread.

There are a few scripts and tools that can make this easier.

Removing a closed AfD discussion

Closed AfD discussions are automatically removed by a bot.

Other types of discussions

You can also add and remove other discussions (prod, CfD, TfD etc.) related to Literature. For the other XfD's, the process is the same as AfD (except {{Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/PageName}} is used for MFD and {{transclude xfd}} for the rest). For PRODs, adding a link with {{prodded}} will suffice.

Further information

For further information see Wikipedia's deletion policy and WP:AfD for general information about Articles for Deletion, including a list of article deletions sorted by day of nomination.

This list also includes a sublist or sublists of deletions related to poetry.

Archived discussions (starting from September 2007) may be found at:

Purge page cache

watch

Literature

Manufacturing Consent (Burawoy book)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Article does not cite any sources. I tried to help the article and breathe new life into it with a non-free image properly uploaded, but it does not appear to be notable. Iljhgtn (talk) 01:37, 23 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: I was just referencing the article as you were adding the deletion notice, and accidentally edit-conflicted. I moved a review from the EL to the body, and found another one here. I'm sure I could find more if given the time. ARandomName123 (talk)^{Ping me!} 01:43, 23 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Additional reviews in Estudios Sociológicos (here), Berkeley Journal of Sociology (graduate-student run, however) (here), Social Forces (here), Journal of Social History (here), Industrial and Labor Relations Review (here), Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science (here) and Contemporary Sociology (here). I could go on, but this is enough to meet NBOOK. ARandomName123 (talk)^{Ping me!} 01:50, 23 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Literature and Social science. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 06:14, 23 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per sources shown above, enough to pass GNG. PARAKANYAA (talk) 02:06, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Inequality by Design

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Completely unsourced article that furthermore does not even seem to reflect the book's actual content. The notability of this minor book (which is just one of multiple such books with an article here!) discussing The Bell Curve is also questionable. Lamptonian (talk) 14:10, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Literature and Psychology. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:35, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep several reviews are in the further reading, off of which this already passes NBOOK. I'm not even going to bother looking for more but I would bet there are - it is not "completely unsourced". PARAKANYAA (talk) 18:36, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: Reviewed in Library Journal(here), Intelligence (journal) (here), Political Science Quarterly (here), Journal of the American Statistical Association (here), European Sociological Review (here), Contemporary Sociology (here), Journal of Developmental and Behavioral Pediatrics (here) and Personnel Psychology (journal) (here). I could keep going (my library's search alone shows at least 35 reviews), but I think it's clear this meets NBOOK. ARandomName123 (talk)^{Ping me!} 19:34, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per above reviews. Geschichte (talk) 20:27, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Save America (book)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

No content that would be sufficient for a separate article. elijahpepe@wikipedia (he/him) 16:07, 21 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 16:13, 21 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politics and United States of America. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:16, 21 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Lengthy reviews in two independent and highly notable publications clearly meets the first criteria of WP:NBOOK. --Here2rewrite (talk) 19:50, 21 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as per nomination. Also, not everything related to Donald Trump is notable by default, including a book that is, in essence, campaign literature. TH1980 (talk) 04:31, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep passes NBOOK. Being a stub is not a reason for deletion. PARAKANYAA (talk) 05:00, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep — seconded that this passes NBOOK. No, not everything President Trump does is notable, but a book which receives SIGCOV is, in my opinion. A quick Google News search reveals what is, in my opinion, SIGCOV from RSs ranging from the Washington Post to the New York Times to ABC. Lastly, I fail to see how the book being “campaign literature” — or not — pertains to this AfD.MWFwiki (talk) 07:57, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge with Bibliography of Donald Trump. As a practical matter it is unlikely that there will ever be enough about this book for an article. Unlike "art of the deal" this one is a re-hash of already seen photos of events covered in the media, so there is no new content, and from what I understand, nothing that we do not already know. Lamona (talk) 03:02, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Neverland (audio drama)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:GNG, can't find any reviews of it online, checked Google and ProQuest, though I might've missed some due to the search term I used to avoid false positives. ARandomName123 (talk)^{Ping me!} 03:09, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Science fiction and fantasy and Literature. ARandomName123 (talk)^{Ping me!} 03:09, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Radio-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 07:23, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Union (James Bond)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Most of this article isn't cited to reliable secondary sources to meet WP:SIGCOV. Aside from sources showing discussing the bond-inspired spy thriller The Union (2024 film), WP:BEFORE did not uncover anything that isn't already mentioned at other related articles. Jontesta (talk) 23:59, 18 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. Jontesta (talk) 23:59, 18 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete or redirect. Even if this was notable (unlikely), the current lack of independent references mean this is all just plot summary/OR, ripe for WP:TNT. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 00:39, 19 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 01:41, 19 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete or redirect per Piotrus. This is mostly WP:OR and is missing independent references to pass WP:GNG. Shooterwalker (talk) 21:40, 19 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to List of James Bond villains#Villainous organisations, where the organization is listed. No indication of notability per the other voters. Magneton Considerer: Pokelego999 (Talk) (Contribs) 05:03, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to List of James Bond villains#Villainous organisations would be the best choice here. TH1980 (talk) 03:55, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Pattern-Oriented Software Architecture

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Article does not comply with MOS and there are no references cited. Se7enNationArmy2024 (talk) 17:36, 17 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 17:48, 17 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Engineering, Computing, and Software. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 20:15, 17 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per the significant coverage in multiple independent reliable sources. Wikipedia:Notability (books)#Criteria says:
A book is presumed notable if it verifiably meets, through reliable sources, at least one of the following criteria:
1. The book has been the subject of two or more non-trivial published works appearing in sources that are independent of the book itself. This can include published works in all forms, such as newspaper articles, other books, television documentaries, bestseller lists, and reviews. This excludes media re-prints of press releases, flap copy, or other publications where the author, its publisher, agent, or other self-interested parties advertise or speak about the book.
Sources
1. DeLano, David E. (December 1996). "C++ Report book review of Pattern-Oriented Software Architecture: A System of Patterns". In Rising, Linda (ed.). The Patterns Handbook: Techniques, Strategies, and Applications. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. pp. 518–521. ISBN 0-521-64818-1. Retrieved 2024-12-22 – via Internet Archive.
  The book's appendix excerpts the entire review of Pattern-Oriented Software Architecture: A System of Patterns written by David E. DeLano in C++ Report in December 1996. The book review notes: "If I have anything negative to say about the book, it is that some of the language and grammar usage feels awkward to the reader. Early versions of the patterns reviewed on the World Wide Web suffered in the use of the language and grammar, but subsequent editing has fixed most of the readability problems. Some portions of the narrative text suffer some of the same stiffness and flow problems, but the importance of the content causes the reader to overlook the style issues. Overall this text is good and I recommend it as an addition to any collection of books on patterns. It also serves as good reading for those interested in topics on software development. As stated earlier in this review, this text should be viewed as a supplement, not a replacement, for existing pattern literature."
2. Glassborow, Francis (October 2000). "Review: Pattern-Oriented Software Architecture". ACCU. Archived from the original on 2024-12-22. Retrieved 2024-12-22.
  The review notes: "The main material is proceeded by an introductory chapter putting it into perspective. The book concludes with two chapters. The first of these is on using patterns as a whole. The final chapter looks at what has happened in the pattern movement since the publication of the first volume and takes a brief look ahead. ... If you understand this and have sufficient experience to be responsible for large-scale design then you should add this book to your library, after having read it once. This book is one of the more important contributions to the literature on 'patterns' and deserves to become a standard text on its specified area of interest."
3. Graham, Ian (October 1997). "Pattern-oriented software architecture (Book Review)". Journal of Object-Oriented Programming. 10 (6): 75–76. ISSN 0896-8438. EBSCOhost 500514125.
4. Murali, D. (2005-06-06). "Control is the key to the Net". Business Line. Factiva BSNLNE0020050605e16600021. Archived from the original on 2024-12-22. Retrieved 2024-12-22.
  The article notes: "Another heavy-duty book for the week is Pattern-Oriented Software Architecture, Volume 3 which is on 'patterns for resource management'. It has been written by Michael Kircher and Prashant Jain, and published by Wiley Dreamtech (www.wileydreamtech.com), bringing down the Indian price to about a tenth of the original US tag. First, a definition of 'resource'. It is an entity that is available in limited supply as for instance "memory synchronisation primitives file handles network connections security tokens and database sessions. "Identifying resource can be challenging, point out the authors. "Very often, the non-functional requirements of a piece of software such as performance scalability flexibility stability security and quality of service depend heavily on efficient resource management."Where do patterns come in? They help capture best practice in solving problems in almost every domain, explain Kircher and Jain. ... A pattern is called Lazy Acquisition, I learn, though I'm too lazy to find out what it does. As for the book, however the pattern I'd suggest software guys and gals to follow is 'eager acquisition'."
5. Less significant coverage:
  1. Linthicum, David S. (1997-10-01). "Patterns demystified. (integrating patterns into software development cycles) (Application Architect) (Technology Tutorial)(Column)". DMBS. Vol. 10, no. 11. M&T Publishing. ISSN 1041-5173. Factiva dbms000020011006dta10005t.
    The article provides two sentences of coverage about the subject. The article notes: "However, the best book on patterns for application architects is Pattern-Oriented Software Architecture (John Wiley & Sons, 1996) by Frank Buschmann, Regine Meunier, Hans Rohnert, Peter Sommerlad, and Michael Stal. (It served as a reference for me for this column, by the way.)"
  2. Bansiya, Jagdish (1998-06-01). "Automating design-pattern identification: DP++ is a tool for C++ programs. (Technology Tutorial)(Tutorial)". Dr. Dobb's Journal. Vol. 23, no. 6. Factiva dobb000020010916du6100022.
    The article provides one sentence of coverage about the subject. The article notes: "While several popular design patterns have been catalogued and described by the GoF in Design Patterns, Frank Buschmann's Pattern-Oriented Software Architecture. A System of Patterns (John Wiley & Sons, 1996), and other books, most designers are not aware of these pattern solutions."
  3. Yang, Bin (2001-05-01). "E++: A pattern language for Java Internet applications, Part 1; Weaving the design patterns together". JavaWorld. Factiva javw000020010711dx510001c.
    The article notes: " Contains many interesting architecture and design patterns:Pattern-Oriented Software Architecture A system of Patterns, F. Buschmann, et al. (New York: John Wiley & Sons, 1996)"
  4. Clemente, Paul (July 2005). "Comparing the SEI's Views and Beyond Approach for Documenting Software Architecture with ANSI-IEEE 1471-2000". Software Engineering Institute. Retrieved 2024-12-22 – via Internet Archive.
    The article notes: "Patterns are published in the literature; perhaps the best-known catalog of architectural patterns is the twovolume set Pattern-Oriented Software Architecture [Buschmann 96, Schmidt 00]."
There is sufficient coverage in reliable sources to allow Pattern-Oriented Software Architecture to pass Wikipedia:Notability#General notability guideline, which requires "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject".
Cunard (talk) 10:13, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per Cunard. That’s enough for GNG and NBOOK. That the article is oddly written is not a reason for deletion. PARAKANYAA (talk) 02:05, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Jamalon

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:GNG; WP:NCORP and NOTCRUNCHBASE very much applies here. Defunct - mostly Arabic - booksales website/POD operation in the Middle East, first in Jordan then the UAE. It started up, it closed down. There is no enduring impact or change in the market that resulted from its existence. The only likely ATD would be a redirect to Fadi Ghandour, but at the most it would be one of hundreds, if not thousands, of investments that Ghandour has made - and it's not really outstanding or worthy of a merge at his page. Alexandermcnabb (talk) 15:36, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Literature, Business, Jordan, and United Arab Emirates. Alexandermcnabb (talk) 15:36, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies and Websites. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:54, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 08:43, 17 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Bhavishya Malika Puran

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I propose taking action on the article "Bhavishya Malika Puran" as it solely presents propaganda spread by news channels for financial gain. Context: The article is highly disputed, and its accuracy as a translation of the original Bhavishya Malika remains unverified. News channels have extensively covered this topic, primarily repeating the claims made by the Pandit. Unfortunately, the errors in this translated book, which appears to be motivated by financial interests, have gone unchallenged. Having carefully examined the book and its issues, I recommend one of the following actions: 1. Archive the article until credible evidence supporting its claims is provided. Or 2. Add a disclaimer to the article stating that it is a controversial issue and establish a Reception section to present a balanced view. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kharavela Deva (talk • contribs) 12:06, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 12:26, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2024 December 7. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 12:38, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Literature and Hinduism. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:30, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep The nominator didn't provide a valid reason for article deletion. However, the subject passes WP:NBOOK. Rajeev Gaur123 (talk) 06:10, 14 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Which of the 5 criteria did it pass for English Wikipedia:Notability_(books)? Would Hindi Wikipedia be more appropriate?Some of the sources appear to be solely in Hindi and/or are interviews, quotes, promotional, or blatanly state that the publisher takes no responsibility: "The above information is based on various sources. Webdunia does not officially confirm it." Alegh (talk) 22:11, 19 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Benison (Beni · talk) 19:06, 14 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:30, 21 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Literature proposed deletions