Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/How to Buy, Sell, and Profit on eBay


 * 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 no consensus. This discussion appears to come down to whether WP:NBOOK and WP:GNG are met. There does not seem to be any claim of GNG being met, on NBOOK it's less clear as there seem to be reviews which may or may not meet the WP:NBOOK criteria - the discussion did not come to a definitive conclusion. So no consensus.

PS: I know that in some other AFD discussions, some participants have stated that they feel a topic may still be deleted if it meets a specific guideline but fails GNG. I didn't factor this point in in this discussion as a) nobody has said so here, b) it appears to be at odds with WP:N which says "A topic is presumed to merit an article if: 1# It meets either the general notability guideline below, or the criteria outlined in a subject-specific guideline listed in the box on the right" and c) this point is typically raised in BLP deletion discussions (where stricter criteria apply) or these involving certain "contentious" notability guidelines, which AFAIK NBOOK is not. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 06:41, 31 May 2019 (UTC)

How to Buy, Sell, and Profit on eBay

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

The book is not notable--it's had no substantial reviews, Nor is the author notable--We deleted the page on him Articles for deletion/Adam Ginsberg (2nd nomination).  DGG ( talk ) 17:52, 16 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 18:43, 16 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Advertising-related deletion discussions. Icewhiz (talk) 19:54, 16 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions. Icewhiz (talk) 19:54, 16 May 2019 (UTC)


 * Keep per WP:NBOOK. The author may not be notable, but that does not mean the book is not. The book has received reviews from publications including Booklist, The Boston Globe and the Miami Herald. This meets WP:BKCRIT criteria #1. MarkZusab (talk) 22:00, 16 May 2019 (UTC)
 * I'm skeptical. the snippet view I can see via Proquest of the Miami Herald Book Review column by Pachter, Richard. 25 Apr 2005: 1. and is clearly about a group of books including " Developing eBay Business Tools For Dummies. John Kaufeld, Tim Harvey. 380 pages. $24.99.", "The eBay Millionaire: Titanium PowerSeller Secrets for Building a Big Online Business" Amy Joyner. Wiley. 248 pages. $22.95. - and possibly others, I can see only a snippet, not including mention of this book. E.M.Gregory (talk) 11:35, 17 May 2019 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Randykitty (talk) 18:06, 23 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete Many generic books still get generic reviews or mentions, and I don't see those this one establishing notability. Reywas92Talk 01:22, 24 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Weak keep The Boston Globe and Booklist reviews (which I accessed through ebsco) feel substantial enough to meet NBOOK. However, if this book were deleted it would not trouble me in the least - it lacks the sort of WP:SUSTAINED coverage notable topics should have and is a pretty clear "no" for me when answering the question posed by the 10 year test. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 18:16, 24 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete No substantial coverage and definitely not sustained. StudiesWorld (talk) 10:08, 25 May 2019 (UTC)
 * WP:NBOOK requires "two or more non-trivial published works appearing in sources that are independent of the book itself.", coverage does not have to be "sustained", whether a review is "substantial" or "non-trivial" is open to interpretation ie. just because a review is short does not necessarily mean it is trivial. Coolabahapple (talk) 01:56, 26 May 2019 (UTC)


 * keep Per recommendations and comments of Barkeep49  Lubbad85   (☎) 01:47, 26 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Comment, this book appears to have sold a fair number (and a 2005 internet related book still being held in around 300 libraries (allbeit, including e-versions?) is pretty good), but did it make any bestseller lists? (another part of nbook criteria 1). Coolabahapple (talk) 02:04, 26 May 2019 (UTC)
 * a best seller list placement supplements but is not required for NBOOK criteria 1. My research indicates best seller list is unlikely. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 04:33, 26 May 2019 (UTC)
 * sorry, badly worded, should have said another tick for notability. Coolabahapple (talk) 05:59, 26 May 2019 (UTC)


 * Delete, coverage is thin and ephemeral, doesn't make it to notable for me. Stifle (talk) 09:38, 30 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep: per Barkeep49. - Ret.Prof (talk) 14:16, 30 May 2019 (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.