Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Encyclopedia of American Biography


 * 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   speedy keep. Nominator !votes keep, no other arguments for deletion. Fences &amp;  Windows  13:46, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

Encyclopedia of American Biography

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

The book is not notable as required by WP:NB if you apply the same logic as being applied to Who’s_Who_in_Nebraska. Drmissio (talk) 12:28, 15 April 2010 (UTC)
 * This AfD nomination was incomplete (missing step 3). It is listed now. DumbBOT (talk) 13:13, 15 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Speedy keep. Disruptive, WP:POINTy nomination by Who’s Who in Nebraska's disgruntled author. No valid reason for deletion given: WP:BK specifically says that it doesn't cover encyclopedias. — Rankiri (talk) 14:10, 15 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 15:55, 15 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep. From WP:NB: "Though the concept of "book" is widely defined, this guideline does not yet provide specific notability criteria for the following types of publications: comic books; graphic novels (although it does apply to manga); magazines; reference works such as dictionaries, thesauri, encyclopedias..." (my emphasis). Thus a valid argument for deletion has not been presented. -- Boing!   said Zebedee  16:09, 15 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Keep -- I am NOT disgruntled -- merely perplexed. Rankiri and "Boing! said Zebedee" have made some good points why this volume, as a reference type work (or encyclopedia) does not "fit" the way in which "notability" is handled for other types of works.  Now -- go read the deletion talk on "Who's Who in Nebraska" -- a similar reference type book (or encyclopedia).  I am just merely raising the question:  What is the right way these types of works should be handled?  and can't those working on Wikipedia apply a common standard to all works within this class or type of material? Drmissio (talk) 23:20, 15 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Note A discussion about creating a guideline for reference works is currently ongoing at Village pump (policy). Please see the page and contribute to the discussion if possible. --Fiftytwo thirty (talk) 00:51, 16 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Keep - Perplexed in Nebraska. Small regional or occupational "Who's Who" volumes are mostly considered vanity works.  Typically they are bought on subscription of the persons represented inside.  Like a high school annual.  Their use outside of this small nucleus is vanishingly small.  A check of WorldCat will confirm this for you or anyone else interested. Wjhonson (talk) 00:11, 17 April 2010 (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.