Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/BookRags (2nd nomination)


 * 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 merge to Ambassadors Group. Black Kite (talk) 19:28, 2 September 2017 (UTC)

BookRags
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Does not meet WP:WEBCRIT or WP:GNG, per source searches. Sources are not providing significant coverage, just passing mentions or listings. North America1000 02:50, 10 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions. North America1000 02:50, 10 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Education-related deletion discussions. North America1000 02:51, 10 August 2017 (UTC)

Keep per the significant coverage in multiple independent reliable sources.  The article notes (my bolding): "www.bookrags.com showcases Argos as an active hound gnawing on the pages of a book. Like Argos, the site hopes its readers would enjoy devouring pages and pages of literature summaries. The site contains concise book synopsises, study guides, lesson plans, quizzes, essays and complete analysis of more than 4,000 literary works. You can also access e-books and biographies here. The site also positions itself as a research destination with a tagline that says research anything. ... From reading e-books to attempting quizzes on famous literary works, the website will keep you hooked. For the literature student it has all that they would need to write perfect literary essays and critiques. The site can also be used to research on a variety of topics. The search results consist of encyclopaedia articles, essays, analysis, news and write-ups from journals, teacher’s resources, activities and homework help. This academic website which was founded in 1999 by James Yagmin and David Lieberman has a simple and neat design. The emphasis is on books and there are few images on each page. Having eulogised the site I must admit the biggest grouse a reader will have is the fact that many of the resources are only for paid users. You will have to surf your way to browse the free samples."  The article notes: "BookRags.com, an education and book-reference site that is owned by Ambassadors Group, has signed a marketing arrangement with BrainyQuote, a website that provides quotes for students and the public. Ambassadors Group, based in Spokane, provides education travel for students and others. It acquired BookRags in 2008. BookRags has created a web advertising network, BookRags Media, that allows partner companies a way to direct ads to the teen and young adult audience using its site for education and research. BookRags Media did a similar deal earlier, forming a partnership with eNotes, an online education resource site."  The article notes: "Spokane travel-planning company Ambassadors Group said Wednesday it will pay $18 million to buy BookRags Inc., an online seller of books, e-books, study guides and articles to students and teachers. ... Privately held BookRags, based in Hamden, Conn., was launched in 1999. Ambassadors will pay $8.5 million in cash and $4.5 million in stock. The remaining $5 million of the purchase agreement will come from future BookRags revenue, the press release noted."  The article notes: "BookRags is a popular academic and research website. It features study guides, lesson plans, and other educational resources on demand. The BookRags catalog is compiled from more than 100 reference sources including Thomson Gale, a reputable publisher of resources for schools, libraries, and universities. Search for book summaries, reviews, author biographies, and bibliographies. Sign up for a free account and earn points toward free content and discounts."  The article notes: "For example, BookRags offers biographies (see www.bookrags.com/ browse/biography/) but aims at college students to sell and rent textbooks, and offer study guides and other course-oriented content. Their 11,250 “literary” biographies are not all free. Of their 25,616 total biographies in all disciplines, only 13,466 are free. The rest provide a “teaser”, then seek payment. In the free section, there is no indication of the author of the biography or the currency."</li> <li> The article notes: "BookRags The site has an impressive 1,500 literary classics online, in full text, for free. The list of books isn't quite as expansive as pinkmonkey.com, but there is an added bonus, especially for those students who have to pull quotations from a book. The summaries in the book notes at bookrags.com are littered with quotes that contain chapter and page number. This makes it easier for the reader to find and cite the quotations in their work. Another unique element to this website is the topic tracking of different themes in each book. Examples of the major themes of the novel are taken chapter by chapter and are conveniently laundry-listed under the appropriate heading. Even though there are fewer titles, this site is definitely very thorough. All of the titles can even be downloaded right into a Palm Pilot or other PDA device!"</li> <li> The article notes: "BookRags, offered only partial summaries free, and Professor Fisher said what he found there was too elementary. “BookRags is for really desperate people,” he said. “It’s simplistic and it forces people to pay up front.”"</li> <li> The article notes: "BookRags.com has a collection of more than 1,500 classic texts in various categories. The site is a good resource centre for students and teachers with an accumulation of guides to classical literature. Book notes are comprised of chapter summaries, character descriptions, author biographies and plot summaries."</li> <li> The article notes: "www.bookrags.com/mob name.html NOT DISSIMILAR to the pokename, white trash and Star Wars name generators, this site measures you up for an assumed character name. In this case, the site will come up with the perfect handle should you wish to masquerade as a mobster. What does mark it out from the other similar sites is the effort it makes to ensure that the name suits: in order to conjure an individual and appropriate moniker, you must divulge rather more intimate details than usually requested. You'll probably end up with a name more at home in a Guy Ritchie movie - Snaggletooth Tony, or Half-cocked Harry - than gangland London, but that'll teach you to waste your time."</li> <li> The article notes: "http://www.bookrags.com: Book Rags is one of the premier online sites for classical guides and free texts. The website offers the complete e-books of approximately 1,500 classical texts."</li> <li> The article notes: "BookRags has a sizable collection of free literature summaries and study guides. Along with chapter summaries, the site covers author/context, plot summary, major characters, objects/places, and quotes. Important topics about the book are also tracked and analyzed throughout the summaries. Keep in mind that all of this is free and you don’t have to pay for BookRags’ premium service."</li> </ol>There is sufficient coverage in reliable sources to allow BookRags to pass Notability, which requires "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject". Cunard (talk) 05:46, 10 August 2017 (UTC) </ul>


 * , would you reconsider your support for deletion? Thank you, Cunard (talk) 05:46, 10 August 2017 (UTC)

<div class="xfd_relist" style="border-top: 1px solid #AAA; border-bottom: 1px solid #AAA; padding: 0px 25px;"> Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  J <i style="color:#137412;">947</i>(c) (m) 05:01, 17 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Many of the sources above do not contain significant coverage, and some are only providing passing mentions. North America1000 05:05, 17 August 2017 (UTC)
 * The Telegraph's 637-word review provides substantial coverage of the subject and the Versus 142-word review provides significant coverage of the subject. Neither are passing mentions. I provided multiple sources that provided less than significant coverage because of WP:BASIC, which says: "If the depth of coverage in any given source is not substantial, then multiple independent sources may be combined to demonstrate notability; trivial coverage of a subject by secondary sources may not be sufficient to establish notability." Although WP:BASIC is under Notability (people), I consider the principle applicable to other topics like this one. Cunard (talk) 07:13, 17 August 2017 (UTC)
 * We'll have to agree to disagree about applying WP:BASIC toward non-biography topics; I don't feel that it should pertain to non-bio topics, because when it was written, it was intended only for bio topics. North America1000 22:43, 30 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Even if we do not apply WP:BASIC to websites, there is significant coverage in The Telegraph and Versus. Cunard (talk) 04:37, 31 August 2017 (UTC)

<div class="xfd_relist" style="border-top: 1px solid #AAA; border-bottom: 1px solid #AAA; padding: 0px 25px;"> Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  J <i style="color:#137412;">947</i>(c) (m) 06:03, 24 August 2017 (UTC) <ul><li>Delete The References are not providing the correct coverage, the article does not get enough support/views, and it does not meet WP:WEBCRIT. I totally agree with NorthAmerica100 on this. AmericanAir88 (talk) 23:31, 28 August 2017 (UTC)</li></ul>
 * According to your contributions, your account was created 21 July 2017 and this is the first AfD you have participated in so you are not experienced in AfD discussions. To clarify about Wikipedia guidelines, WP:NOBODYREADSIT is not a policy-based reason for deletion. Cunard (talk) 04:37, 31 August 2017 (UTC)


 * Delete. I have reviewed all the references cited in the article, and none provide sufficient depth of coverage. They are either corporate announcements, trivial mentions or self-published. has provided some additional references in their 'keep' !vote that are not used in the article, though they needn't. Of these, only the review in the Telegraph India's CareerGraph ("a special four-page colour guide for students and graduates on the lookout for jobs and career opportunities")  by freelance journalist Tessy Koshy provides the type of in-depth coverage required to establish notability.
 * I have looked at each of the articles about competitors listed in the 'See also' section and there's questionable notability on some of those, too, and York Notes has no references at all - I have tagged it. Curb Safe Charmer (talk) 20:24, 30 August 2017 (UTC)

AmericanAir88 (talk) 02:27, 1 September 2017 (UTC)
 * ,, and , I would like to merge BookRags to Ambassadors Group, where BookRags is already mentioned, in lieu of deletion. Would you support that? Cunard (talk) 04:37, 31 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Definitely. It would make more sense than deletion and it would also give opportunities for expansion on Ambassadors Group
 * Keep. Cunard hss the right idea here--merge to the parent company, as is customary for relatively borderline notability . We could avoid a good number of AfDs by doing this more often.  DGG ( talk ) 12:41, 1 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Merge to parent. L3X1 (distænt write)  19:31, 2 September 2017 (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.