Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Advanced Perl Programming: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
Wow, Amazon lists this as the 188th best selling Perl programming book. That's notable? |
MalnadachBot (talk | contribs) m Fixed Lint errors. (Task 12) |
||
| (8 intermediate revisions by 5 users not shown) | |||
Line 1:
<div class="boilerplate metadata 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 talk page or in a [[Wikipedia:Deletion review|deletion review]]). No further edits should be made to this page.''
<!--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 in order 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 '''no consensus'''. [[User:Spartaz|Spartaz]] <sup>''[[User talk:Spartaz|Humbug!]]''</sup> 02:47, 7 July 2011 (UTC)
===[[Advanced Perl Programming]]===
:{{la|Advanced Perl Programming}} – (<includeonly>[[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Advanced Perl Programming|View AfD]]</includeonly><noinclude>[[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2011 June 19#{{anchorencode:Advanced Perl Programming}}|View log]]</noinclude>)
Line 33 ⟶ 39:
*::: The fact that "you and I read them" (in the figurative, not literal, sense) would seem like the very definition of notability to me. —''[[User:Ruud Koot|Ruud]]'' 10:59, 30 June 2011 (UTC)
*::::When I went to Amazon.com to look up this book, I searched under books for "Perl programming". I got 764 results (just books) and sorted by "bestselling". This title was '''number 188'''. Maybe we should write articles about numbers 1 thru 187. There was another book with the exact same title with a different publisher and author listed at number 107. This is an obscure book on a very specialized topic with a rather limited audience. That was my point about "you and I read them". IT professionals, especially ones who write Perl code, is a pretty limited subset of the population. --[[User:Rogerd|rogerd]] ([[User talk:Rogerd|talk]]) 14:58, 30 June 2011 (UTC)
*:::::What does that have to do with anything? "Notable" doesn't mean [[WP:ILIKEIT|"I think it's important"]], it means [[WP:GNG|"has significant coverage in multiple independent reliable sources"]]. [[User:Chaos5023|—chaos5023]] ([[User talk:Chaos5023|talk]]) 15:12, 30 June 2011 (UTC)
*::::::What "significant coverage in multiple independent reliable sources"?? The article has references to two obscure publications (yea, I get ''Network Computing'', too, and so can anyone else who has an email address), and you listed a collection of blog posts that from the publisher's web site (but thankfully didn't include that as a reference, since it doesn't qualify). Big deal! Between the two of us, we have written about as much about this book as your "multiple independent reliable sources" have. Remember from GNG, "''self-publicity, advertising, self-published material by the subject, autobiographies, and press releases are not considered independent''". I know you think this is a cool book, but there isn't much else to justify keeping it. I am trying to [[WP:AGF|assume good faith]], but what is your great concern with keeping this obscure little book from being deleted? --[[User:Rogerd|rogerd]] ([[User talk:Rogerd|talk]]) 17:08, 30 June 2011 (UTC)
*:::::::I give up. You can review [[WP:RS]] for what a reliable source is and why your personal belief that a publication is "obscure" doesn't relate to it, and I'll note that "oh gosh I really want to AGF but I just can''not'' imagine that you would argue the way you're doing without a hidden COI" is not what success at AGF looks like. Beyond that, I'm done. If the article gets deleted because of this nonsense, it'll be trivial to get it back at DRV. [[User:Chaos5023|—chaos5023]] ([[User talk:Chaos5023|talk]]) 17:33, 30 June 2011 (UTC)
:::::::::My goodness, Chaos5023. This can't be the first AfD where someone's taken a position you don't agree with. Anyway, it appears you have the !votes to win, but that's not enough? I think you could agree to disagree, be a gracious winner and move on. There's no need for histrionics about going to DRV if you don't get your way. [[User:Msnicki|Msnicki]] ([[User talk:Msnicki|talk]]) 17:53, 30 June 2011 (UTC)
<hr style="width:55%;" />
:<span style="color:#FF4F00;">'''[[WP:RELIST|Relisted]] to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.'''</span><br />
:<small>Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, [[User talk:Master of Puppets|<span style="color:#7d7d7d">m.o.p</span>]] 04:59, 29 June 2011 (UTC)</small><!-- from Template:Relist -->
<hr style="width:55%;" />
:'''Delete''' per [[User:Rogerd]]. A couple of positive book reviews do not confer notability. [[User:TallNapoleon|TallNapoleon]] ([[User talk:TallNapoleon|talk]]) 06:00, 29 June 2011 (UTC)
Line 42 ⟶ 53:
:: Gimme a break, that's an ad in another book by the same company, not a review. [[User:FuFoFuEd|FuFoFuEd]] ([[User talk:FuFoFuEd|talk]]) 05:58, 30 June 2011 (UTC)
:::* Ok, here's a review in ''[http://www.linuxjournal.com/article/2523 Linux Journal]''. Q.E.D. [[User:Colonel Warden|Warden]] ([[User talk:Colonel Warden|talk]]) 06:45, 30 June 2011 (UTC)
* '''delete''' per nom, '' 'an average programming book' ''. We've recently seen either the Camel or Llama books (maybe both) at AfD and either of those had a really significant impact on Perl and the Perl community. This one didn't. It's a good book, but there's just not much to say about it - which is reflected in an article here that says less than a typical Amazon review would. [[User:Andy Dingley|Andy Dingley]] ([[User talk:Andy Dingley|talk]]) 18:30, 30 June 2011 (UTC)
:''The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. <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 talk page or in a [[Wikipedia:Deletion review|deletion review]]). No further edits should be made to this page.'' <!--Template:Afd bottom--></div>
| |||