Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Choice (Goldratt book)


 * 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__EXPECTED_UNCONNECTED_PAGE__ to Eliyahu M. Goldratt. (non-admin closure) Natg 19 (talk) 01:44, 20 July 2023 (UTC)

The Choice (Goldratt book)

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

Tagged for notability since 2010, and has no sources cited. Could be merged to Eliyahu M. Goldratt or theory of constraints as an WP:ATD. - UtherSRG (talk) 17:59, 13 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Literature and Philosophy. UtherSRG (talk) 17:59, 13 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Redirect to Eliyahu M. Goldratt. I found this but nothing more, so the book itself fails GNG as far as I can see. A redirect to the author seems the most sensible. I don't think there's a lot that needs to be merged, since the article is largely an unreferenced summary of the book's contents. WJ94 (talk) 18:30, 13 July 2023 (UTC)
 * @WJ94 Do we have any valid sources verifying this summary mentioned in this article? If yes I am happy to redirect. Okoslavia (talk) 19:30, 13 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Typically, a book is its own source for its summary. A book of course can't prove its own notability, but it can WP:VERIFY its own contents, which is what an inline cite is for. So we could move this content to the author's article and cite the book for it. ~ L 🌸  (talk) 07:08, 14 July 2023 (UTC)
 * As says, the book can verify its own content so if someone wanted to merge some of the article's content to the author's article then they could - although any interpretation of the book's content would need support from a reliabale secondary source to avoid being original research. However, it is another question as to whether we should include any of that material at the author's page; my own view is that summarising each of Goldratt's books on his article when they haven't been discussed by reliable sources would give them undue weight, but others could reasonably disagree with me. So while I support a redirect over a merge, I wouldn't be opposed to someone at a later date incorporating some of the material into the Goldratt article (with proper attribution). WJ94 (talk) 11:16, 14 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Redirect as an alternative to deletion. No reviews at Booklist, PW, or Kirkus, which usually means there's nothing to be found anywhere else either. Without two reviews, fails WP:NBOOK. ~ L 🌸  (talk) 07:10, 14 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Thanks LEvalyn. Happy to redirect. Okoslavia (talk) 09:24, 14 July 2023 (UTC)
 * UtherSRG Are you okay with redirect? Okoslavia (talk) 09:26, 14 July 2023 (UTC)
 * My support of merge should imply a support of redirect, so yes. :) - UtherSRG (talk) 10:38, 14 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Thank you UtherSRG. So there is a consensus now to merge the content and create a redirect. Shall we close this discussion and merge the content by creating a redirect? Okoslavia (talk) 14:21, 14 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Need to allow time for others to weigh in. AFDs take a minimum of a week to complete. - UtherSRG (talk) 14:30, 14 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Redirect to Eliyahu M. Goldratt (with the history preserved under the redirect), where the book is mentioned, per Deletion policy. I did not find significant coverage in reliable sources about the book in my search for sources. I was able to find only this 86-word coverage in Midwest Book Review. This article from business-improvement.eu is of unclear reliability. Cunard (talk) 00:33, 17 July 2023 (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.