Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Advanced Perl Programming: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
No edit summary |
+k |
||
Line 20:
* 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)
* The fact the publisher has reused the title for completely different book (as "2nd edition") is another argument for non-notability. Compare with [http://books.google.com/books?id=vUbJkdl6vIcC Oracle PL/SQL programming], another book from the series with multiple editions or with [[Learning Perl]], which also has multiple editions and at least claims in the preface of the 5th edition to have had half a million readers, a significant number for a programming book. [[User:FuFoFuEd|FuFoFuEd]] ([[User talk:FuFoFuEd|talk]]) 19:48, 20 June 2011 (UTC)
*'''Keep'''. A minimal effort, i.e. looking through [http://oreilly.com/catalog/praise.csp?isbn=9781565922204 this page] for the sources that Wikipedia would consider reliable, demonstrates notability. I'd do the rescue legwork like I did at [[Perl Cookbook]], but I'm feeling like I should spend some time on my actual job. [[User:Chaos5023|—chaos5023]] ([[User talk:Chaos5023|talk]]) 17:17, 24 June 2011 (UTC)
| |||