Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Bible (A Parody)


 * 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. WP:SNOW  MBisanz  talk 04:55, 31 December 2008 (UTC)

The Bible (A Parody)

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

It's just some book someone wrote. It gives no assertion of notability. The sources are also completely lacking and most can't even be called reliable sources. The book has won no awards, gotten no press, or anything that would make it notable. If you google "The Bible (A Parody)", the only thing that comes up is a couple stores selling it and that's all. Are you ready for IPv6? (talk) 12:35, 30 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete, NN per Notability_(books) Usrnme h8er (talk) 12:47, 30 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete Book is not covered outside of Wikipedia except for retailers selling the book. Lacks coverage in press.  RT  13:11, 30 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Yay, though I wander through the valley of the shadow of Delete... Thou disregards the law as set forth in the Book of Jimbo in relation to WP:Notability (books). And if you don't believeth in me, then consult with my bretheren -- Esau, Ecame and Econquered. Ecoleetage (talk) 13:32, 30 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete--but hey Eco, don't go having too much fun now. Drmies (talk) 14:56, 30 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete according to Amazon, it was "published" by iUniverse. Andrew Lenahan -  St ar bli nd  16:47, 30 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete Non-notable book. Only notability claims are that there's seven copies at one local library and that the creator won two NN Bible contests. Doc StrangeMailbox Logbook 17:59, 30 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep for a bit I'll wager that this 87 page parody is as hilarious as it sounds from the many reviews I read online. Did a G-search and apparently it's available in more than just one library, and for less than $10. Cheaper than a night out. I think that the title alone will disgruntle folks, even if the contents are as funny and topical as the reviews say... and for that reason alone it will be removed from wiki even though it might actually be a fine little article with some work. MIght even take a crack at it myself. Gotta respect the author's using THE GOOD BOOK in a parody though.  BUT.... How dare he try to feed others the fruit from the tree of humour.!!  That alone will have him banished fron the Garden of Wiki. .. left to wander amoung the billions in a world of stoicsm.   Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 19:12, 30 December 2008 (UTC)
 * I bow to the inevitable. May it go in peace.  Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 02:47, 31 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete, based soley on the fact that it doesn't meet notability requirements.  Linguist At Large  19:54, 30 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete as non-notable book. Also, It seems as though MichaelQSchmidt has some sort of conclict of interest with this book. Rwiggum  (Talk /Contrib ) 20:20, 30 December 2008 (UTC)
 * To: User:Rwiggum. To what are you referring??? I never even heard of this book before it was brought to AfD.  Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 20:27, 30 December 2008 (UTC) Apology accepted.  Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 02:47, 31 December 2008 (UTC)
 * I was simply referring to your language in your defense of the article. You didn't comment at all on the merits of the article per notability guidelines, rather you went on about how great and cheap the book was. I simply stated that it seemed as though you may have a conflict of interest. If this is not the case, then I apologize. Rwiggum  (Talk /Contrib ) 20:29, 30 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Accepted. No harm, no foul. The book sells for $10. Thought that was cheap entertainment. I have been learning in my reserach that this young author created a modern parody of the Jewish Torah... which is in text nearly identical to the Old Testament. Unfortunately his title causes confusions because it is not a parody of the Christian Bible. As for commenting on the delete opinions of a sourced article.... I am being more proactive and trying to improve the article. I'd rather fix a leak than complain about the dampness.  Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 21:06, 30 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Fix a leak, yes... but the water is now too deep even for me. Time for Last Rites.  Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 02:47, 31 December 2008 (UTC)
 * WP:AFG, my brethren... D ARTH P ANDA duel 20:49, 30 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Amen and Shalom.  Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 21:09, 30 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions.   -- Raven1977 (talk) 22:32, 30 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.