Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gazetteer of British Ghosts (1971)


 * 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 redirect to Peter Underwood.  MBisanz  talk 10:55, 12 May 2016 (UTC)

Gazetteer of British Ghosts (1971)

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Article created by a family member of Peter Underwood, who seems to be using Wikipedia to promote Peter Underwood's Ghost books. No evidence this book is notable enough to have it's own entry. The sourcing is entirely inappropriate. For example reference 13 is just a list of books, some of which are self-published. HealthyGirl (talk) 20:35, 3 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete There's no indication of notability anywhere in the article, beyond the blatantly synthesized claim at the end that many (non-notable) books reference this one. I couldn't find any significant, third party coverage. Furthermore, the content of the article seems to be entirely sourced to the author's other books. MjolnirPants   Tell me all about it.  20:39, 3 May 2016 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Paranormal-related deletion discussions. HealthyGirl (talk) 20:48, 3 May 2016 (UTC)


 * Delete and merge redirect to Peter Underwood. The article is chock full of completely unsourced promotional puffery stated in Wikipedia's voice. Examples:
 * "[the book] ''conferred authority to Underwood (in terms of thoroughness of research), and a concomitant degree of seriousness and significance to his work"
 * "[the book] ''changed the field of paranormal literature, and became the basis for many subsequent works that modelled themselves on it"
 * "[the book] ''would help constitute a 'library of psychic knowledge"
 * "Other authors also recognise their debt to [the book]"
 * It might be OK if these were actual quotations from reliable secondary sources, but they appear to be all one editor's WP:OR opinions. - LuckyLouie (talk) 21:59, 3 May 2016 (UTC)

Note: Several paragraphs of commentary by have been moved from this page (where they seems inappropriate and distracting) to the article's talk page. The permalink for this move is here, in case the article is deleted). MjolnirPants   Tell me all about it.  14:24, 5 May 2016 (UTC)


 * Accept or Merge and merge redirect to Peter Underwood.:
 * the article was originally passed/accepted as a quality contribution with correct formatting/citation guidelines
 * re claim that "[the book] ''conferred authority to Underwood (in terms of thoroughness of research), and a concomitant degree of seriousness and significance to his work": - the claim on the inside jacket cover of the Gazetteer of British Ghosts is that it is the first comprehensive survey - the novelty of the use of the gazetteer form to systematise the accounts or so-called 'sightings' of the paranormal "Here for the firs time, catalogued and placed in alphabetical order, are well over two-hundred accounts of ghostly happenings"; Underwood set the trend for paranormal literature to come (much of the subsequent literature on folklore and the paranormal was modelled on this novel form; previously you had collections of ghost stories and legends; collected oral histories; Underwood collected and brought together his accounts from all over the country - hence the self-evident seriousness of the endeavour in the act of systematisation and comprehensiveness.
 * re claim that "[the book] ''changed the field of paranormal literature, and became the basis for many subsequent works that modelled themselves on it": it became the basis for many subsequent works that modelled themselves on it (Underwood personally recommended Haunted Britain (1973) by Hippisley Coxe, who includes Gazetteer of British Ghosts in his bibliography).Decades later, Haunted Britain (2001) by Richard Jones, follows the same model of the geographical survey established by the Gazetteer - as can be seen from its table of contents - covering reports and stories of ghosts and haunted places according to the same division of the country into regions (just as he did in his Haunted London (2009), which modelled itself on Underwood's own Haunted London (1973) - the first comprehensive survey of London). (see also response to first point above)
 * re claim that "[the book] ''would help constitute a 'library of psychic knowledge": The Gazetteer formed part of a series edited by Paul Tabori called 'Frontiers of the Unknown' - there are over half a dozen titles that Tabori commissioned that together constituted the so-called 'library of psychic knowledge' (again, that is a quasi-blurb from the back cover); but again, all this work is very much to do with the legacy of the work of Harry Price - who's archive currently exists at Senate House in London (paranormal historian Paul Adams was bequeathed Peter Underwood's archives - Underwood corresponded with Price and produced his Ghosts of Borley (co-written with Tabori) on the back of his own investigative work and through a full internalisation/comprehension of the two books Price produced on Borley)
 * re claim that the book lacks notoriety (see response to above claim): I have found a link to a review from TIME MAGAZINE : http://content.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,909941,00.html and an Academic Journal - http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/0015587X.1971.9716735 ; In an interview with the BBC, Underwood elaborated upon the account he gave of the ghost associated with Littlecote House; BBC. "Peter Underwood Ghosthunter at Large". Retrieved 2016-05-04; http://www.bbc.co.uk/wiltshire/content/articles/2005/10/26/ghosthunter_261005_feature.shtml ; Underwood subsequently took part in a BBC 1975 documentary The Ghost Hunters, where he discussed Borley - which he covered in the Gazetteer (pp.30-8) ( https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5IcMi0gppVc - NB :this link would never be intended for use as a citation)
 * re claim that sources need to be found on Jstor etc (see response to above claim - sources have been found that can be located on Jstor: http://www.jstor.org/action/doBasicSearch?Query=%22peter+underwood%22+gazetteer&acc=off&wc=on&fc=off&group=none
 * re claim that "Other authors also recognise their debt to [the book]" There are ten instances of citation of the Gazetteer in The Penguin Book of Ghosts: Haunted England by by Jacqueline Simpson, Jennifer Westwood which is not immediately apparent because the republished title - The A-Z of British Ghosts - is the title that is cited - but it is the same edition: (https://www.amazon.co.uk/Penguin-Book-Ghosts-Haunted-England-Jacqueline-Simpson/dp/184614101X ) See also the liner notes of music artist Llewellyn (1998), who's album Ghosts (New World Music (new edition released in 2003 by Paradise Music)), is directly indebted to the Gazetteer of British Ghosts by Peter Underwood; see also Phil Rickman's The Smile of a Ghost (2005, Macmillan), which is directly indebted to Underwood's account of Ludlow (Gazetteer of British Ghosts. pp. 156–158)- mentions Underwood within the novel by name by a character - as well as being used as an epigraph, and citation in the bibliography.Sherlockpsy (talk) 08:55, 6 May 2016 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sherlockpsy (talk • contribs) 08:53, 6 May 2016 (UTC)


 * Delete as certainly still questionable for its own article. SwisterTwister   talk  23:01, 9 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. Lemongirl942 (talk) 06:02, 11 May 2016 (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.