Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Defending the West: A Critique of Edward Said's Orientalism (3rd 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   delete. Tone 19:03, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

Defending the West: A Critique of Edward Said's Orientalism
AfDs for this article: 
 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

There is no evidence that this book ever received any mainstream attention. The article cites no reliable, third-party sources &mdash; indeed, no sources at all. It was created in March 2007 by a a now-banned user who repeatedly engaged in anti-Muslim POV pushing. The lack of mainstream attention means that it is not only impossible to meet verifiability, but also impossible to write a neutral article as our policies require. Any article would invariably give undue weight to fringe anti-Islam sources. *** Crotalus *** 17:38, 31 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom - there's no evidence in the article that WP:BK is met and no reason to assume that a book like this would meet it. Nick-D (talk) 10:16, 2 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Wait. I've got both books requested from my local library, so I'll read them and see if the criticisms of the book(s) are correct. This isn't the first request to delete this page, so I don't see any urgency. Tangurena (talk) 17:51, 2 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment The article has been nominated for deletion on the grounds that the book isn't notable. As such, reliable sources which provide significant coverage of the book are needed. Nick-D (talk) 22:51, 2 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete. I'm forced to concur with Nick-D; it does not appear likely that this subject will meet the requirements of WP:BK. A book can exist and still not meet our criteria for inclusion. UltraExactZZ Claims~ Evidence 17:03, 3 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Deletein addition to lack of third party refs, this author has debatable notability, and the publisher is considered a type of vanity press in the bookselling world. considering the subject matter, if this book had any substance it would have been debated vociferously by both pro and anti-Said intellectuals. since its not, its not notable to anyone but the publisher and author.Mercurywoodrose (talk) 03:13, 4 September 2009 (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.