Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Learned pigs & fireproof women


 * 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   keep. (non-admin closure) Jmundo (talk) 03:12, 7 October 2010 (UTC)

Learned pigs & fireproof women

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

The article fails to meet WP:BK. Searching Google News, Google Books and generally there appears to be little chance that the criteria for notability will be addressed in the near future. PROD removed, hence upgrade to AfD. Fæ (talk) 12:34, 30 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Merge: to Ricky Jay. Joe Chill (talk) 21:49, 30 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Changed to Keep: Passes WP:BK. Joe Chill (talk) 00:05, 6 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Extremely weak keep. First of all: I own this book.  I love this book.  It's also a collector's item to some extent, although not nearly as much as Jay's book about using cards as weapons.  I think it might just squeak by WP:BK in that it was adapted to a TV special (with Steve Martin!).  I'll leave it to the community to decide whether that's enough or not. Andrew Lenahan -  St ar bli nd  23:34, 30 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 00:35, 1 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep 15 minutes before it was nom'ed? On a new editor's very first edits? How WP:BITEY can we get!  How about doing something positive to improve the article, rather than trying to stomp new editors. Andy Dingley (talk) 00:51, 1 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep. Weakly, possibly--but in this Google book search there is a number of interesting hits, including this one. The book is cited and referred to often enough; I don't doubt that reviews can be found as well (though those don't show up so easily with a slightly older book, of course). Drmies (talk) 02:30, 1 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep A quick browse soon turns up a statement that "Learned Pigs and Fireproof Women was named a "notable book of the year" by the New York Times" and this then leads me to a good review which establishes notability. Please see WP:BEFORE. Colonel Warden (talk) 09:15, 1 October 2010 (UTC)
 * No need to be bitey, Colonel. I think Fae knows that guideline and I will assume good faith that they followed it; so should you. Drmies (talk) 13:56, 1 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Good source, happy to see a speedy keep on that basis. Fæ (talk) 09:42, 1 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Suggestion: how about I add in some more information regarding the review found by the Colonel and mention the televison show adaptation? Would that be helpful? Azeban (talk)
 * Sure, go for it. There's no chance now that your article will be deleted so you can proceed without worrying about that.  I have started a talk page for the article which contains links to sources and that will help you find more.  Look at articles about other books for ideas on how to structure and format this one.  And welcome to Wikipedia. Colonel Warden (talk) 15:52, 1 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Keep it is possible to find plenty of reviews in the reliable media. Clearly a notable book. --Vejvančický (talk | contribs) 07:41, 3 October 2010 (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.