Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of volumes in ReViewing Chess (series)


 * 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. Courcelles 00:16, 22 November 2010 (UTC)

List of volumes in ReViewing Chess (series)

 * – ( View AfD View log ) •

Non-notable book series lacking GHits and GNEWS of substance. Appears to fail WP:NOTBOOK.  ttonyb (talk) 00:32, 15 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions.  -- Jclemens-public (talk) 01:03, 15 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions.  -- Jclemens-public (talk) 01:03, 15 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete, nothing but a collection of external links. Wikipedia is not a directory. J I P  &#124; Talk 05:06, 15 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete Fails NBOOK, no significant coverage online from WP:Reliable sources, article is mostly a huge batch of Amazon links, with consequent highly WP:PROMO tone. Top Jim (talk) 09:18, 15 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete No notability, possible hiden advertising. SyG (talk) 21:29, 16 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete None notable books per WP:NBOOK. Regards, SunCreator (talk) 00:10, 18 November 2010 (UTC)


 * Delete - just a collection of links. Bubba73 You talkin' to me? 00:45, 18 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete. The content is not an informational encylopedia article, nor does it serve any navigational purpose in binding together articles or serve any developmental purpose as suggested by WP:LIST. I agree with SyG's and Bubba73's comments. Sjakkalle (Check!)  10:07, 18 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment: The author made this comment on the talk page: "This series is about the first chess book seris designed specifically for kindle. If that is not notable, nothing is." This seems very overdriven to me. The way I understand it, it means the same as "the first chess book series designed specifically for Kindle is not only the most notable thing in the world, it's the most notable concept that could ever exist". More notable than the Kindle, more notable than chess, more notable than us humans, more notable than the Earth, or the entire universe. I'm amazed the author hasn't realised how ridiculous such a claim sounds. J I P  &#124; Talk 20:15, 18 November 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.