Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gib Rides Home


 * 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The result was withdrawn Non-admin_closure Savonneux (talk) 08:14, 23 August 2015 (UTC)

Gib Rides Home

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Per WP:NBOOK The book has been the subject of two or more non-trivial published works. I can only find one review on publishers weekly which really shouldn't even count as it's routine coverage of almost all fiction released in the US. Also the article is borderline WP:INDISCRIMINATE Savonneux (talk) 04:15, 21 August 2015 (UTC)


 * Keep and Expand per WP:BITE and WP:DONOTDEMOLISH: This is a new editor and a bit of help in how to expand and create a better article is in order.  Being mentioned at publisher's weekly at all is something.   Montanabw (talk)  01:46, 22 August 2015 (UTC)
 * That's a little unfair. I helped out the creator with their other articles.--Savonneux (talk) 05:10, 23 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. &mdash;&thinsp;JJMC89&thinsp; (T·E·C) 03:28, 22 August 2015 (UTC)


 * Comment: While PW is a trade journal, they do not review every book that gets released in the US. They review a lot, but they are selective in what they choose (for every one they review there are at least hundreds that they do not) and the final reviews do undergo some sort of editorial process. There has been no official consensus on whether or not trade reviews of this type are unusable as a source and at this point in time they are considered to be acceptable. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)  03:56, 22 August 2015 (UTC)
 * However that said, if the PW review is the only thing that's out there, then that would not be enough to salvage the article. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)  03:57, 22 August 2015 (UTC)


 * Keep. There are sources, although they aren't the easiest to find if you don't know where to look. I will say that the article does need to be worked on as a whole, but now that notability has been established that's something that can be done at leisure. I also note that the book seems to be used as an educational tool in some classrooms, although that's more of an aside since it gives off the impression that there are likely more sources out there that are not on the Internet since this was written before the Internet really blew up to what it is now. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)  04:09, 22 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Im not sure if being on a suggested (not required) reading list is the same as The book is, or has been, the subject of instruction at two or more schools. Subject of instruction usually means being the topic of a class or at least a lesson. If it get's cleaned up I dont see why it couldnt be put on the author's page and a redirect put at this location. Many author's books can't meet the threshold for standalone articles.--Savonneux (talk) 05:12, 23 August 2015 (UTC)

You didn't tell me you found more reviews -.- Withdrawn by nominator--Savonneux (talk) 08:06, 23 August 2015 (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.