Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Heath Ledger: Hollywood's Dark Star


 * 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. Wikipedia is not about presenting new information. It is an encyclopedia. Since this book has not received significant critical acclaim or review, it is premature for this article to promote it. Notability is not inherited.  Jerry  talk ¤ count/logs 03:09, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Heath Ledger: Hollywood's Dark Star
AfDs for this article: 
 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

Delete non notable book no reliable sourced reviews found, and appears to be a print on demand title Mayalld (talk) 12:21, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete (also a contested prod, though no explanation given) - although about a notable person, the book itself appears to be non-notable (unless someone can show it's been on a bestseller list). CultureDrone (talk) 12:26, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete. Does not assert notability. Could be merged into Heath Ledger after all. GregorB (talk) 13:25, 9 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions.  -- Mattinbgn\talk 02:49, 10 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete no evidence of notability, and it's highly unlikely that a book like this would be notable. Note that this article has been previously speedy-deleted as spam, but the content has been expanded since that version so I don't know if it can be re-speedied. Nick Dowling (talk) 03:27, 10 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions.   --  Fabrictramp  |  talk to me  19:59, 10 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep I saw this three days ago on the shelf at Border's off Union Square in San Francisco. And it was rather prominently displayed, too. The article cries out for a good rewrite, not a deletion -- I suspect there are plenty of sources out there to back up its notability. Ecoleetage (talk) 23:21, 13 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Merge suitable content to Heath Ledger. DigitalC (talk) 01:06, 15 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep. The subject of this book is entirely notable, and the information in this publication sheds new light and information upon this subject, so it too must be notable. It is also being well publicised in the UK at the present, and reflects a high profile release. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 2j-hova5 (talk • contribs) 10:27, 15 July 2008 (UTC)
 * User's only contribution. Theresa Knott | The otter sank
 * Keep. This book must be considered notable because it explores Ledger's life and works, which, particularly in the wake of the attention surrounding his death, has irrefutable cultural significance. Therefore,a deletion would be very much against Wikipedia's aim to provide both factual and cultural knowledge. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Curtisjackson3 (talk • contribs) 10:43, 15 July 2008 (UTC)
 * User's only contribution. Theresa Knott | The otter sank


 * 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.