Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lazarus Rising: A Personal and Political Autobiography


 * 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The result was   NOMINATION WITHDRAWN. WWGB (talk) 11:41, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

Lazarus Rising: A Personal and Political Autobiography

 * – ( View AfD View log )


 * Delete. The book fails all criteria at WP:NBOOK. John Howard is not so historically significant that anything he writes is automatically notable. Contested prod. WWGB (talk) 03:36, 11 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment. Actually, it meets category 3, 4 and 5. Secondly, Howard is notable. He is Australia's second longest serving Prime Minister. This a notable bestselling book. Whatever your personal opinion is keep it out. Is The Latham Diaries a notable book?Jarrodaus11 (talk) 03:43, 11 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions.  —WWGB (talk) 03:43, 11 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions.  —WWGB (talk) 03:43, 11 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions.  —WWGB (talk) 03:43, 11 April 2011 (UTC)


 * Comment. Fits category 3, 4, 5.


 * 3.The book has been considered by reliable sources to have made a significant contribution to a notable motion picture, or other art form, or event or political or religious movement.
 * Really? Please direct me to those sources who consider the book to have made a significant contribution. WWGB (talk) 03:53, 11 April 2011 (UTC)
 * 4. The book is the subject of instruction at multiple grade schools, high schools, universities or post-graduate programs in any particular country
 * Again, I would like to know which institutions have listed the book as a subject of instruction. WWGB (talk) 03:53, 11 April 2011 (UTC)
 * 5. The book's author is so historically significant that any of his or her written works may be considered notable. This does not simply mean that the book's author is him/herself notable by Wikipedia's standards; rather, the book's author is of exceptional significance and the author's life and body of work would be a common study subject in literature classes Jarrodaus11 (talk) 03:44, 11 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Anything that Howard writes in the future will be automatically considered notable, due to his "exceptional significance"? WWGB (talk) 03:53, 11 April 2011 (UTC)
 * That would be judged if Howard writes something in future. Besides, that is totally irrelavent to this. Jarrodaus11 (talk) 03:55, 11 April 2011 (UTC)


 * Keep passes NBOOK #1. See for example, and it was a #1 non fiction bestseller. Lionel (talk) 04:48, 11 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep. I have no time for John Howard, but it is clear that this book is notable. Political books from the left are much more likely to sell well. This one from the right has sold very well indeed and been well noticed by reviewers. -- Bduke   (Discussion)  11:08, 11 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep. This book has already been set as reading material for VCE Australian Politics Resources 2012–2016 for UNIT 3: EVALUATING AUSTRALIAN DEMOCRACY; Area of Study 1: Australian democracy, by the Victorian Curriculum and Assessment Authority --Whiteguru (talk) 11:23, 11 April 2011 (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.