Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Age of Napoleon


 * 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 and redirect to The Story of Civilization. Consensus that the Herold book is non-notable, but the title is a worthwhile redirect for the unrelated Durant book. czar ⨹   01:33, 7 December 2014 (UTC)

The Age of Napoleon

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

I'm unsure if this work passes the notability guidelines for books. Internet searches suggest this is not the most notable book by this title - perhaps a redirect to The Story of Civilization would be more prudent? The title seems more notable as a piece of the Durant work than this book by Herold. S.G.(GH) ping! 22:22, 24 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:44, 25 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:45, 25 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of History-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:45, 25 November 2014 (UTC)


 * Comment: I'm honestly unsure of what to think of this book. I can't find any reviews or in-depth coverage of the book but I do see where the work is or at least has been fairly regularly used in college coursework. and has been used as a source in other books with some regularity . It's a little frustrating to say the least. Tokyogirl79  (｡◕‿◕｡)   05:01, 25 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep per Tokyogirl79. If the book has been taught at a university or is regularly cited it satisfies WP:TBK. As a plausible redirect to The Story of Civilization, the page isn't eligible for deletion on grounds of notability anyway (WP:R). James500 (talk) 03:48, 26 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete Tokyogirl79 - Were you looking at course syllabi in terms of satisfying WP:NBOOK point #4 "The book is, or has been, the subject of instruction at two or more schools,[5] colleges, universities or post-graduate programs in any particular country.[6]"? If so, I read that as meaning that the book itself was studied, not that it was used in studies of its topic. Does that make sense? I don't find it cited often (G Scholar, 69 times), although it seems to be fairly commonly held in academic libraries. I don't think that makes the book itself notable, however. LaMona (talk) 01:30, 28 November 2014 (UTC)
 * WP:TBK has "taught" or "required reading". To adopt your terminology, I read that as meaning that the book was used in studies of its topic (because the lecturer directed its use). James500 (talk) 10:10, 28 November 2014 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NorthAmerica1000 23:24, 1 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete -- Even if it were required reading on some undergraduate courses (or once was), I do not think it would merit an article: we cannot have an article on every book. A history undergaduate would be expected to read (or at least sample) dozens of books.  I would expect a 1964 book on as general a subject as this to have been replacved by more recent works long ago.  Peterkingiron (talk) 19:00, 4 December 2014 (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.