Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Small is Profitable


 * 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The result was   nomination withdrawn, see article history. Chase me ladies, I&#39;m the Cavalry (talk) 05:40, 29 November 2008 (UTC)

Small is Profitable

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

Does not appear to be a notable book and may be simply advertising. The only link is to the page to buy the book. Cannot find this book listed under the Economist "Book of the Year", at least not on their website. Unless this or similar accolades can be found, I recommend deleting this as spam JanPieterszoonSweelinck (talk) 03:23, 27 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep. Can't believe this has gone up for AfD. This book is part of a List of books by Amory Lovins.  Info on the Economist award is here: 'Small Is Profitable' Named 'Book of the Year' by The Economist; Book Brings New Thinking to Electricity Industry. Highly notable. Johnfos (talk) 03:47, 27 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep Lovins has been a leading writer on appropriate technology since the early 1970's and this book won the "Book of the year" award from The Economist. It says that smaller more distributed generators have advantages over larger more centralized generators (where have we heard that before, circa 1882?) It satisfies notability requirements via substantial coverage in multiple reliable and independent sources, as seen at Google News Source . See,  ,  , and  ,   , to select a few of the refs which can be used to improve and expand the article. Please withdraw the nomination. Edison2 (talk) 04:51, 27 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep. While hardly "highly notable", the economist award makes it notable. Bongomatic (talk) 06:09, 6 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep The Economist Book of the Year seems to assert notability for me. It's a stub but that's no reason to delete it. Mvjs   Talking  08:13, 13 October 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.