Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Adrift: 76 Days Lost At Sea


 * 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   keep. Courcelles 23:59, 23 August 2011 (UTC)

Adrift: 76 Days Lost At Sea

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Non-notable book, this article has been here for several years and yet has no sources. The Mark of the Beast (talk) 21:55, 16 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep- 36 weeks on NYT Best Sellers list is 'non-notable'? Dru of Id (talk) 22:13, 16 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions.  —Tom Morris (talk) 22:39, 16 August 2011 (UTC)


 *  Keep The only question is whether an article on the book is sufficient, but in this case the events giving rise to the book are also significant, so we can justify having two articles. I am however open to the possibility of merging the article on the book in here. That can be discussed on the talk p. later. I note the article at the time of the AfD had a number of sources, several of which are certain;y RSs for notability.  DGG ( talk ) 23:56, 16 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Am I missing something? I don't see a single source on the page.  The Mark of the Beast (talk) 00:06, 17 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment the New York Times best seller lists are here (number 11) and (number 10) . There's also mention of a re-issue of the book here with the suggestion of a review by NYT having already taken place ("The book is 'highly readable,' Jules Koslow said here last year,"). It looks from this as if the book may also have been made into a play of the same name. I haven't seen any reviews of the book itself yet, though. Ka Faraq Gatri (talk) 10:09, 17 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Further to above, it looks like it was reviewed by Jules Koslow in NYT Review of Books on 12 January 1986 but the text of that review doesn't appear to be available online. See the record here. Ka Faraq Gatri (talk) 10:35, 17 August 2011 (UTC)


 * Keep by way of common sense. 36 weeks on the bestsellers list, makes the book notable.   D r e a m Focus  06:40, 23 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Merge with Steven Callahan. The author's wikipedia entry mostly concerns the book and actually has better information on the book than the page itself does. The author is really only notable for this one book so a merging and a redirect from the title entry just makes more sense than keeping the book entry separate. 208.31.209.179 (talk) 08:19, 23 August 2011 (UTC)tokyogirl79
 * 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.