Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Life Is Real Only Then, When 'I Am'


 * 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   redirect to George Gurdjieff. (non-admin closure) Esquivalience t 00:07, 27 March 2015 (UTC)

Life Is Real Only Then, When 'I Am'

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Article is unsourced and tagged as such for at least six years. Recently added sources fail WP:RS and or are promotional. Article fails WP:V and WP:CITE. No evidence of notability. Article is likely a form of soft SPAM. Article has been the recent object of an edit war with one editor ignoring WP:CONSENSUS and the aforementioned guidelines and policies. Suggest Redirect to the author's article page.

Note: The author is notable, however notability is not inherited. Ad Orientem (talk) 22:52, 20 March 2015 (UTC)


 * COMMENT - I do not know enough about the topic area to opine on whether the subject (a book) actually is notable or not. However, I can say that the article gives the reader no indication as to why the book might be notable.  As it currently stands, the article is nothing but a summary of the contents of the book.  What is needed is a section on the book's reception in the real world. Are there any reviews of the book? (if so, what do they say about it)  Has it won any awards? (which awards and why were they awarded?)  Is the book considered influential (and if so, by whom?)  Is it on a university level curriculum? (if so which schools?).  That is the sort of information that the article needs to mention in order to properly establish notability. Blueboar (talk) 23:17, 20 March 2015 (UTC)
 * COMMENT I can't guess either. I merely had it on watch as interesting at some point in the past when I saw the contents being removed simply because no one had stepped up to look into sourcing. I see two directions for salvage: (1) Establishing notability as a book (2) Moving some subset of the content, along with independent sources into a section of the author's bio. But I don't see this a 24 hour project, more like 24 days. If it would help my rule-bound co-editors, I'm happy enough to move the article and its history into a user subpage, and I can work on it from there, and link the move work at the bio article talk page if anyone else wants to help. Tom Ruen (talk) 00:08, 21 March 2015 (UTC)
 * p.s. At least a quick web search found a number of resources that reference the book, listed hereTalk:Life_Is_Real_Only_Then,_When_%27I_Am%27 Tom Ruen (talk) 17:02, 22 March 2015 (UTC)
 * In the Course of Performance: Studies in the World of Musical Improvisation, p.165.
 * , Journal for the Academic Study of Religion, Vol 27, No 3 (2014), The Value of E. J. Gold: Unearthing the Real Mr. G.
 * A Gurdjieff Genealogy: Tracing the Manifold Ways the Gurdjieff Teaching Has Travelled
 * Channelling the Creative: Keith Jarrett’s Spiritual Beliefs Through a Gurdjieffian Lens Johanna Petsche
 * Journal for the Academic Study of Religion, Vol 27, No 3 (2014), Fasting in Christianity and Gurdjieff, Journal for the Academic Study of Religion, Vol 27, No 3 (2014) Situating G. I. Gurdjieff’s Meetings With Remarkable Men
 * Gurdjieff and Twentieth Century Culture Dr. Levan Khetaguri Professor and Director of Arts Research Institute of Ilia State University
 * Situating G. I. Gurdjieff’s Meetings With Remarkable Men
 * The Reality of Being: The Fourth Way of Gurdjieff, By Jeanne De Salzmann
 * , Without Benefit of Clergy, By Frank R. Sinclair
 * J.G.Bennett‟s Interpretation of the Teachings of G.I.Gurdjieff a study of transmission in the fourth way, Thesis submitted for the degree of PhD University of Lancaster February 1995
 * The Enneagram in the Writings of Gurdjieff By Richard J. Defouw
 * Reich and Gurdjieff, By David M. Brahinsky


 * Userfication seems a reasonable suggestion, although I would add the caveat that if/when the time comes, the article should be sent to AfC for approval before being restored to the mainspace. -Ad Orientem (talk) 00:20, 21 March 2015 (UTC)
 * In the meantime we can redirect the current article page to the author's page pending approval by AfC of any revised article. -Ad Orientem (talk) 00:24, 21 March 2015 (UTC)
 * I haven't been able to find anything that rings the notability bell. The sources cited above appear to be some combination of affiliated, fringe, and or trivial, They generally fail RS. I stand by my recomendation as nom that the article be deleted and redirected to the author's page. Any merging of content should only be conducted if the content is backed by properly cited RS sources. -Ad Orientem (talk) 03:08, 23 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:52, 21 March 2015 (UTC)


 * Delete page and add the minimal independently sourced content to either the main article on the author or perhaps an All and Everything trilogy article if that is proven to be either notable in and of itself or if it is decided to merge the other two articles on books of the trilogy into one article. But, having used the links to the various searches for the topic above, I don't see anything in them to indicate that this particular book is itself separately notable. John Carter (talk) 15:38, 21 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete or redirect; when a controversial or WP:FRINGEy topic lacks coverage by independent sources, we can't maintain neutral content. bobrayner (talk) 22:47, 21 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Redirect to George_Gurdjieff. As of right now there is no page on the trilogy and if it's ever proven that the trilogy is notable enough for an entry, this can always be changed to redirect there. That said, I can't find anything to show that this specific book ultimately passes notability guidelines. It exists and it is an official part of the trilogy, but notability is not automatically granted by a book's existence (WP:ITEXISTS) or by the potential notability for the series or the notability of the author (WP:NOTINHERITED). This is a fairly common issue with trilogies in general and with fringe works in specific. Most times when fringe works receive coverage it's almost always in places that Wikipedia does not consider to be reliable. I know that reliable sources usually translates to "mainstream" (at least in comparison to the topic at hand) and that mainstream sources tend to ignore works like this. However at the same time Wikipedia still requires those reliable sources and this site cannot be expected to help give exposure to something that has at this time not received coverage in RS. Until a page on the trilogy comes about, I think that the best option here would be to redirect to the specific section highlighted above, since it does mention this work and the trilogy. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)   06:08, 22 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete and Redirect - I found three scholarly textstwo that cite the book, and one which makes a passing reference to it. There are other books that briefly mention the book, such as this one. Otherwise, the subject does not seem to meet any of the five criteria of WP:NBOOK, and only would meet WP:GNG if we counted the many trivial mentions.- MrX 19:44, 22 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete and Redirect - I agree. There's not enough sourcing here to merit this page's existence but a summarized version of this content might be relevant to the author's page. --Salimfadhley (talk) 22:11, 22 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Deleted entirely non notable, no sources couldn't find any RS on the book. - - MrBill3 (talk) 01:49, 23 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete yeah, no WP:RS has been able to establish notability. It should be deleted. Full stop, them's the rules.-- Shibboleth ink (♔ ♕) 05:06, 25 March 2015 (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.