Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Energy Autonomy: The Economic, Social & Technological Case for Renewable Energy


 * 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. The discussion has shown that the book does meet the notability guideline. Davewild (talk) 17:45, 17 July 2014 (UTC)

Energy Autonomy: The Economic, Social &
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Can't find any references that make me figure this is a book that meets WP:NBOOK. Mikeblas (talk) 03:05, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete - not a notable book. I assume that is the nom's reason. VMS Mosaic (talk) 04:05, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete. Indeed, I'm having a hard time finding references to make it meet notability. (Sorry; every once in a while, I somehow miss entering the reasoning in afd2.)) -- Mikeblas (talk) 13:19, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep. I found three reviews from peer-reviewed journals and a mention in an issue of The Ecologist, which looks to be a book review as well. I'm also finding where this book is used as a source in various different texts and papers. The original article was fairly rough, but there's enough on there now to asset enough notability for a keep. It needs more TLC, preferably from someone more aware of the topic material than I am, but I've done enough to clear up the most pressing issues. Tokyogirl79  (｡◕‿◕｡)   04:25, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep. Totally agree with TG -- the book is clearly notable. Hermann Scheer was a well-known German, and there are many editions and book reviews in European languages, see . There is also quite good coverage in English, see, , , , etc. Johnfos (talk) 04:20, 12 July 2014 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:46, 11 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Environment-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:47, 11 July 2014 (UTC)


 * Keep per Tokyogirl79 and Johnfos. It seems that after edits by Tokyogirl79 the issue with WP:NBOOK has been resolved. Beagel (talk) 06:39, 12 July 2014 (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.