Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mysterious Canada- Strange Sights, Extraordinary Events, and Peculiar Places


 * 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 of the debate was keep. - Mailer Diablo 02:35, 26 December 2005 (UTC)

Mysterious Canada- Strange Sights, Extraordinary Events, and Peculiar Places
Non-notable book. Amazon.com sales rank near the bottom of the heap. The stub is nothing more than a poorly spelled book report. Durova 17:34, 20 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom.Gateman1997 18:52, 20 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Very strong keep. Notable book (at least here in Canada) by a very notable author. Have you tried the sales ratings for Amazon.ca? It was also published in 1989 so most of its sales pre-dated the Internet. In any event, I'm surprised John Robert Colombo doesn't have an article yet. He's up there with Pierre Berton. And do a Google search -- this book is referenced all over the place. Additional: book is not listed at Amazon.ca suggesting it is out of print. A book being out of print should not have a bearing on whether it deserves an article or not. 23skidoo 22:24, 20 December 2005 (UTC)
 * I appreciate the cleanup. If you add some citaton of cultural relevance I'll withdraw the nomination. Regards, Durova 05:03, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
 * I leave for 2 weeks vacation in about 10 minutes. Someone else will have to do this. I do not, however, believe that this is necessary. What defines "cultural relevance"? Should one just put a link to the Google search page? This ain't Gone with the Wind we're talking about here. 23skidoo 12:04, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep per 23skidoo. Obviously.  CanadianCaesar The Republic Restored 23:11, 20 December 2005 (UTC)
 * I'd change that hyphen to a colon, but John Robert Colombo is a notable writer. Consider him stubbed. Oh, and while I wouldn't deem this particular title to be his most notable work, I think Wikipedia is generally of the view that any title by a notable writer can have an article, so keep. Bearcat 18:36, 22 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep: It's a book, the ISBN is cited. I don't see a problem here...a book doesn't have to sell millions to be relevant.--Hraefen 18:48, 22 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep, as per above comments. --GrantNeufeld 00:26, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep, published book by notable author. Kappa 23:30, 23 December 2005 (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.