Talk:ThriftBooks

AfD Discussion
This is a restored article which has been tagged multiple times for db-spam. It is an advertisement. The previous discussion was rigged as rigged gets, with multiple new users voting whose only edits or history are this article AT THE TIME OF AfD DISCUSSION. Ultimately, the vote was 3-2 with all three of the "for" quite possibly being the same user. (User:LoneWriter even edited User:Measure's User Page as though the same person). The discussion also involves the owner/manager, who then admits information for the article was copied directly from Thriftbooks' website.

This is a non-notable topic written as an ad, not an article, and then kept by a rigged vote. It's time for this to go. --BizMgr (talk) 06:38, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
 * If there is advertising, it is not blatant enough for speedy deletion. With the company having been covered in the Seattle Times, the article doesn't qualify for A7 either. Feel free to bring it to AFD again though. A  ecis Brievenbus 12:50, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

Removing Blantant Advertising
It's apparent this shill article was place by either thirftbooks or by their shills. It appears that it has been nominated for deletion multiple times. So, instead, let's remove the marketing hype. meatclerk (talk) 02:11, 8 May 2011 (UTC)

Can not verify facts from article posts Stated:
 * The company had over $1.2 million in sales its first year.
 * In fact, company official stated, "expects more than $1.2 million in sales".
 * This is not the same as having $1.2M in sales
 * In February 2010 Thriftbooks sold its 10 millionth book.
 * In fact, quoted from a company that posts Press Releases. Stated as, "PRWeb reported."
 * Press Release on PRWeb found link to it on thriftbooks.com/PressRelease.aspx
 * Business Model section based on speculation. No basis in facts.
 * Press Release on PRWeb found link to it on thriftbooks.com/PressRelease.aspx
 * Business Model section based on speculation. No basis in facts.

Very poor entry
Virtually no statement in this entry is backed by any proof. The one link that may have been useful is now 404. Nicmart (talk) 14:43, 28 July 2019 (UTC)
 * There aren't many secondary sources on the topic, but it's relatively easy to find sources for most of the statements in the article, which is rather matter-of-fact. Nemo 17:51, 28 July 2019 (UTC)

Can we add books that they published? Some are titles that benefit society.
Can we add books that they published? Some are titles that benefit society..

For example, they publish books about religion as well as veteran's issue.

An example of books about veteran issues would be "Memoirs" of a Vietnam Veteran's Son. Starlighsky (talk) 03:56, 17 June 2023 (UTC)


 * They're primarily a used book seller, not a publisher, so they could potentially sell just about every book ever published, just like any other used book store. It seems rather pointless to list any particular books that they might happen to have in stock. On top of that, you'd have to have a reliable source that says which books are ones the "benefit society", and which of the thousands of such books are the ones that deserve to be singled out in such a manner. So, the answer is "No". Indyguy (talk) 04:09, 17 June 2023 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I edit a lot here and learned something new.
 * This does bring up an interesting question that I will present in Teahouse:
 * What does Wikipedia consider a good book based on published references? Starlighsky (talk) 12:55, 17 June 2023 (UTC)
 * thiftbooks atlanta is a good place to buy a book 24.214.150.182 (talk) 23:37, 8 February 2024 (UTC)