Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Learning Perl

Learning Perl

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

No independent secondary sources to establish notability as required by WP:GNG or WP:NBOOK. Google search reveals blog posts and reader reviews at Amazon and elsewhere, but no formal reviews that qualify as reliable sources WP:RS. Wikipedia is not a catalog WP:NOTCATALOG. Msnicki (talk) 08:55, 19 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. — • Gene93k (talk) 01:45, 20 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. — • Gene93k (talk) 01:45, 20 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Cited in 47 other books. —Ruud 10:50, 20 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Nowhere in WP:NBOOK do I see any provision that allows mere citations to be considered as evidence of notability. Msnicki (talk) 13:54, 20 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Nowhere in WP:NBOOK do I see any provision that makes mere citations not relevant to establishing notability. —Ruud 14:10, 20 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

But silly policy wonking aside, if 47 authors thought it was a good idea to refer their readers to this particular book, then that's probably a good indication the book is indeed quite notable. —Ruud 14:15, 20 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

And if you can convince other editors to add language to WP:NBOOK that supports that reasoning, I'm on-board. Too bad for you, I don't think that's going to happen. Msnicki (talk) 14:19, 20 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]