Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Black Book of Buried Secrets


 * 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   redirect to The 39 Clues. –MuZemike 20:21, 16 June 2010 (UTC)

The Black Book of Buried Secrets

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

Though this book is a rather important and expected companion book of the considered popular series, The 39 Clues, most information for the book is yet unknown, including the book cover, contains, and authors. Many of the information released by this time of the nomination is still yet final. Therefore, according to WP:CRYSTAL, I nominate this article for deletion. Mktsay123 (talk) 07:16, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

This should not be deleted info will come i promise —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.250.76.234 (talk)  17:59, 6 June 2010 (UTC)  Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 02:06, 9 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete While the cover and at least the author of the introduction is known (or at least presumed known, see ), there is absolutely no indication that this book is notable or ever will be notable per WP:BK. VernoWhitney (talk) 11:34, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 13:18, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.


 * Weak keep I think that enough information is presented in the source within the article to make a page for this, if 98.250 wants to make good on the promise.  Although October 26, 2010, is still four months away, the publisher has authorized the release of enough fact to take this beyond just being a crystal ball.  Obviously, if not kept, then it would be redirected to The 39 Clues and then all of the new information would be added there, awaiting whatever date that people decide is not "crystalbally", but it's a tomayto-tomahto situation.  I say tomayto.  Mandsford 14:40, 9 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Right, it's not a WP:CRYSTAL situation, but it's not one of the 10 novels in the series or I'd probably lean keep too. Is there an indication that it would pass WP:BK that I'm missing? VernoWhitney (talk) 14:51, 9 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Redirect Because of WP:CRYSTAL, I'm inclined to say that this should be redirected to The 39 Clues until it can pass the standards at WP:BOOK. If, closer to the time this can be done, then by all means, go ahead and create the page. Thanks, Rock drum (talk·contribs·guestbook) 16:40, 15 June 2010 (UTC)
 * I see no problems with redirection as the number of hits indicate that it is being searched. VernoWhitney (talk) 16:44, 15 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Redirect to The 39 Clues per above until such time that this book is notable enough for a stand alone article.-- Pink Bull  18:39, 16 June 2010 (UTC)

Verno  Whitney You  Told Me    To  Come Here. What Would You Like Me To Join. --JabocJacobOhYeah (talk) 03:25, 1 March 2011 (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.