Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Advanced Perl Programming: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
→Advanced Perl Programming: if != iff |
|||
Line 16:
::::Nowhere in [[WP:NBOOK]] do I see any provision that makes mere ''citations'' '''not''' relevant to establishing notability. —''[[User:Ruud Koot|Ruud]]'' 14:10, 20 June 2011 (UTC)
:::::What part of ''"A book is generally notable if it verifiably meets through reliable sources, one or more of the following criteria: 1. The book has been the '''subject of multiple, non-trivial''' published works whose sources are independent of the book itself ..."'' [emphasis added] seems unclear? (This book certainly doesn't appear to meet any of the other criteria.) [[User:Msnicki|Msnicki]] ([[User talk:Msnicki|talk]]) 14:35, 20 June 2011 (UTC)
:::::: The part where it says "if" instead of "[[if and only if]]". —''[[User:Ruud Koot|Ruud]]'' 15:53, 20 June 2011 (UTC)
* I've been looking to see how other publishers are treated in Wikipedia. For example Springer has [[Graduate Texts in Mathematics]], a single article for the whole series. The individual blue links are to math articles not to book articles. I'm certain that every book in that list has some reviews in mathematics journals. They do no qualify for individual articles according to [[WP:NBOOK]] though, which requires at least one such review in a venue of general interests, which mathematics textbooks are unlikely to have, as are programming books. Perhaps creating an article for [[O'Reilly Media#Animal books]] would be more reasonable. The series can be presumed to be more notable than the individual books. (Oddly enough someone created an article only for their less notable [[Head First (book series)]]) Right now O'Reilly Media#Animal books lists only a handful of books, the selection is haphazard, and the individual articles do not even show how they pass [[WP:GNG]], let alone the more demanding NBOOK. I doubt the other/missing books in the series differ significantly in (real-world) notability. [[User:FuFoFuEd|FuFoFuEd]] ([[User talk:FuFoFuEd|talk]]) 12:28, 20 June 2011 (UTC)
| |||