Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Guinness world records, 2009


 * 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. PhilKnight (talk) 12:14, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

Guinness world records, 2009

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

I see absolutely no need for Wikipedia to have articles on individual books in an annual series, rather than having a simple Guinness World Records article for the book in general. Georgia guy (talk) 16:33, 19 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete. Reads like an ad. --Blanchardb- Me • MyEars • MyMouth -timed 18:12, 19 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Redirect to Guinness World Records, as the article for the 2008 edition currently does. Note the template at the foot of the page with entries for each year - this template may need amendment also. Ros0709 (talk) 18:51, 19 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Actually, since there are only two annual editions that have articles, and one is a redirect and the other one being discussed here, I believe that template should be deleted. In fact, I am going to initiate a TfD right away. --Blanchardb- Me • MyEars • MyMouth -timed 20:22, 19 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Done. See Templates for deletion. --Blanchardb- Me • MyEars • MyMouth -timed 20:33, 19 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete Looks like someone read off the Amazon.com page about all the cool things and posted it here. This installment isn't notable by itself. Doc StrangeMailbox Logbook 20:26, 19 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions.   —• Gene93k (talk) 21:02, 19 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete. This has to stop. This is G11/G12 from Guinness. I redirected the 2008 edition by the same editor, but the 2009 edition and the template indicate the editor is just getting started. • Gene93k (talk) 21:15, 19 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete Eye-catching sunburst holographic cover? 100 percent new photographs?  A pair of 3D glasses?  Put this one down on page 315 under "Most pathetic advertisement".  Mandsford (talk) 23:30, 19 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete per everyone ("this book will be most up-to-date so far" is rather priceless though) nancy  (talk) 08:32, 20 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete - Not sure what else to add, everyone has made a good argument so far. Definitely looks like an advertisement to me. --  At am a chat 17:30, 24 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete as advertisment. Redirect and add info to the series article.Yobmod (talk) 09:08, 25 July 2008 (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.