Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Worker in the Light

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was Redirect, consensus is that the article fails the notability guidelines but that a redirect is appropriate. Davewild (talk) 18:02, 8 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Worker in the Light

WP:BK failure, it seems to me. ScienceApologist (talk) 00:37, 3 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete non notable, and fails book notability standards Yamakiri ^T_C § 08-3-2008 • 00:56:17 00:56, 3 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Fails WP:BK. Juliancolton ^Tropical ^Cyclone 01:52, 3 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete no evidence of notability Redirect per Zagalejo. JJL (talk) 02:15, 3 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete unless someone can come forward with evidence that it is notable. I don't think wikipedia is a catalogue of anything that has been printed and assigned an ISBN. --Falcon Darkstar Kirtaran (talk) 08:13, 3 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to George Noory, where the book is already briefly mentioned. Zagalejo^^^ 19:03, 3 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect per Zaga, I think it's a viable search term and the author's article could provide the reader with what s/he's looking for. TravellingCari 19:39, 3 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Merge/Redirect per above. --brew crewer (yada, yada) 03:34, 4 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. -- Fabrictramp | talk to me 15:14, 5 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.