Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Damned Good Show


 * 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.  Notability has been sufficiently established (non-admin closure). Cunard (talk) 21:57, 22 October 2008 (UTC)

Damned Good Show

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

NN book, fails WP:BK, no sources. Mister Senseless&trade; (Speak - Contributions) 04:48, 13 October 2008 (UTC) 
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions.   --  Fabrictramp  |  talk to me  16:34, 14 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep - I added two reliable source reviews to the article with citations and I have found another one shown below where I only have the abstract. This should prove that there are multiple sources providing critical commentary to satisfy WP:BK.
 * Connelly, Mark. "How did they do it?." TLS (20 Dec. 2002): 20. Abstract: Reviews the book 'Damned Good Show,' by Derek Robinson.--Captain-tucker (talk) 17:51, 14 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:08, 18 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  NuclearWarfare  contact me My work  21:02, 22 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep With added RS reviews, article meets WP:NB item #1 (multiple reviews) MadScot (talk) 21:11, 22 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep there are now 3 RS reviews, one in the TLS, above. I accept TLS alone as notability. DGG (talk) 21:13, 22 October 2008 (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.