Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Manifest Destinies: The Making of the Mexican American Race


 * 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.  MBisanz  talk 00:40, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

Manifest Destinies: The Making of the Mexican American Race

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

This article sounds like someone's homework, very unencyclopedic. It also sounds like a textbook page regarding book. Wikipedia is not a textbook. The purpose of Wikipedia is not to teach subject matter. Fangfufu (talk) 00:44, 9 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete --- has no bonafide references. Brokethebank (talk) 01:00, 9 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete. Creation by user:Manifestdestinies suggests spam to me. &mdash; RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 02:53, 9 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Weak keep. First of all, the article is terrible, no doubt about it. Second, the creator's name is fishy, to say the least. But really, if the creator is the author, why write such a terrible thing about your own book? Now, AfD discussion should be about the subject also, this book, and a quick search revealed already two non-trivial, independent mentions, this one and this one. Granted, that's not a whole lot yet, but I have not yet looked through the databases at my library--I get the feeling that a review or two are easily found, since this is a pretty hot topic. Honestly, I'd like to blank the entire article, except for the opening sentence, and start it from stub. And I would have done that already, but that would muddle the AfD discussion--I just don't want the atrocious quality of the article to stand in the way of what might be a notable entry. Drmies (talk) 03:29, 9 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of History-related deletion discussions.   -- • Gene93k (talk) 13:54, 9 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions.   -- • Gene93k (talk) 13:58, 9 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Comment At first I was going to suggest delete (and I'm an inclusionist) because this article reads like a book report and has zero references. Drmiess comments softened my stance but this article is terrible.  Raitchison (talk) 16:33, 9 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Weak keep per Drmies. I'm willing to let this go through a copyedit and for sources to be found before it's deleted. If there's no improvement, then it should be deleted. Ancemy (talk) 22:02, 9 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep I would never have guessed it from the article, but it's a notable book. The creator is extremely unlikely to be the author, who is full Professor of Law and American Studies at U. New Mexico, and definitely notable enough for an article, having written a number of other books from good academic publishers--the one link in the article is the catalog listing for the book at a New England college, which is apparently where the student  book review was written.  The book, by NYU Press, a very respectable academic publisher,  is already in over 500 worldcat libraries, very substantial for an academic book  Several reviews have already been found, and there will probably be a good many more. As for the article, stubbify and add the efs to the reviews. DGG (talk) 00:42, 10 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Weak Keep Althought this article is horrible, the lack of references doesn't mean that they dont exist, as I find reason to believe in the subject's notability as a book. The article needs to be hacked to pieces, but as a whole, it should probably stayMrathel (talk) 05:28, 10 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: after a bit of editing, the article looks a little bit different. I found one three reviews so far and have added it them. Drmies (talk) 20:44, 10 December 2008 (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.