Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Beyond Eagle and Swastika


 * 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The result was withdrawn. --BDD (talk) 22:45, 30 November 2012 (UTC) (non-admin closure)

Beyond Eagle and Swastika

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

No sources provided to establish notability or to provide secondary material for the article, which mainly consists of the table of contents of the book. This seems to have been a fairly important book, but I was also not able to find any reviews or discussions of it in other works. It has been cited a lot, but without secondary sources WP doesn't consider it notable. BigJim707 (talk) 02:56, 30 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep It appears there aren't many online sources for this older book, but I found a bunch of reviews. For example, there's The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, Political Science Quarterly , The Western Political Quarterly , The Journal of Politics , and The American Historical Review . Almost half a century later, there are also close to 1000 libraries worldwide that own it, based on WorldCat. I don't endorse the article in its current form—the table of contents is inappropriate for an encyclopedia article—but WP:TNT isn't called for. --BDD (talk) 19:07, 30 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I guess your searching methods are better than mine. I would say keep if some information from these reviews could be included in the article. BigJim707 (talk) 19:33, 30 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Never underestimate the power of a librarian! I was inclined to agree with you from a Google search. I've added a couple of the reviews, which happened to have been by historians sufficiently notable to have their own articles. I'll try to get information from some of the others in there. --BDD (talk) 19:51, 30 November 2012 (UTC)


 * Nomination withdrawn Thanks to BDD's work the notability of the book is now established and the article improved. BigJim707 (talk) 22:39, 30 November 2012 (UTC)
 * 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.