Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Gifts of the Child Christ (collection)


 * 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. Consensus seems to be that a stand-alone article is unwarranted, and none of the "keep" opiners have adduced sources that could be used to satisfy the GNG. Recreation as a redirect is at editorial discretion if anyone thinks such would be useful. Deor (talk) 14:51, 25 June 2014 (UTC)

The Gifts of the Child Christ (collection)

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Book that fails WP:NBOOK. Mikeblas (talk) 14:54, 5 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:14, 6 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:14, 6 June 2014 (UTC)


 * Keep. George MacDonald was a major, major fantasy writer and this was pretty much the definitive collection of his shorter work. Article is currently quite lousy, but can be be readily cleaned up bu someone with access to appropriate print sources. Originally published in the 1880s, so contemporaneous online coverage is quite skimpy, of course. The Big Bad Wolfowitz (aka Hullaballoo) (talk) 10:38, 6 June 2014 (UTC)


 * Delete There is no question that George MacDonald is a very important writer and not just of fantasy. Many of his works are also independently notable, such as The Princess and the Goblin, The Princess and Curdie and Lilith to name three. However, this edition of his children's short stories is not particularly notable. It is a revised edition of the book published in 1882 as The Gifts of the Child Christ, and other tales. The book in this article was published by W. B. Eerdmans Pub. Co. in 1973 (apparently not 1972), was edited by children literature specialist Glenn Edward Sadler, and was entitled The gifts of the child Christ; fairytales and stories for the childlike. See OCLC list. For unknown reasons the article was retitled on 19 September 2013‎ by MrLinkinPark333 from The Gifts of the Child Christ; Fairy Tales and Stories for the Childlike in Two Volumes (collection) to The Gifts of the Child Christ (collection). When first posted in July 2013 it was an orphan article, however MrLinkinPark333 provided a single article link, in the George MacDonald article, by linking the 1882 title to the Sadler edition. This is not the definitive collection of his shorter works, for example his essays and more adult short stories are not included. Neither this edition, nor the original work received much coverage.  If you search for mention of the original work, you'll find almost all of them are lists, without any direct coverage,  the original work did receive some press in 1882, but as it says in the review at Truth there is little to admire in it. I do not believe that even the 1882 original work is notable under WP:BOOK. --Bejnar (talk) 23:43, 13 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Comment I'll explain my actions. First, I renamed the article according to WP:SUBTITLES. Regarding the collection, it was republished as Stephen Archer in 1972/73. Since the ISBN shows that it's the republished version, I think it should be renamed Stephen Archer and Other Tales (collection). I apologize for the error. --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 00:24, 14 June 2014 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure what MrLinkinPark333 means about this isbn, which is for The gifts of the child Christ; fairytales and stories for the childlike. The title Stephen Archer, and other tales for other editions of these stories, goes back to at least 1905 oclc record here, copy here, and probably to this 1892 edition incomplete record. The only edition near 1972/1973 with the Stephen Archer ... title is not this one, but is one published in 1971 by Books for Libraries Press, OCLC records here. So far as I can determine, none of the various reissues edited by Sadler were entitled Stephen Archer .... Of course all of this is irrelevant, as neither the original edition, nor any of the reissues are notable. --Bejnar (talk) 22:01, 14 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Comment/Weak Keep Looking up the ISBN in the infobox using Worldcat shows that this version has Stephen Archer in the collection. Looking at your versions creates some confusion. Regarding the notability, shouldn't this fit WP:BKCRIT? I also found the 1882 version referenced in a book about consumers and an academic paper about George MacDonald and C.S. Lewis. --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 22:26, 14 June 2014 (UTC)
 * 1.) Yes, the short story named "Stephen Archer" is included in all of the editions, but that does not make this 1972/73 edition susceptible to the title Stephen Archer .... --Bejnar (talk) 06:28, 15 June 2014 (UTC)
 * 2.) No, it does not meet WP:BKCRIT, as a quick look at Google Scholar will inform you. His religious work is somewhat studied, but not his whole body of work. Take a look, for example, at The Golden Key: A study of the fiction of George MacDonald (1961) by Robert Lee Wolff. --Bejnar (talk) 06:28, 15 June 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 01:23, 14 June 2014 (UTC)


 * Delete - There's no doubt about it the author is notable, But sadly this book isn't, I found no evidence of notability. – Davey 2010 •  (talk)  14:35, 14 June 2014 (UTC)


 * Comment A redirect to George_MacDonald would be an alternative to deletion.  --j⚛e deckertalk 22:32, 22 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete I suppose a redirect is possible, but the collection is so little known that I'm not sure even it is justified. I agree that some of the individual stories might be individually notable.  DGG ( talk ) 19:10, 24 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Redirect to George MacDonald, book doesn't even come close to passing GNG, if it were a film, site, magazine, etc it would have qualified under A7. However, the author is notable, and no harm can come from redirecting one of his works to his page. ♥ Solarra ♥ ♪ 話 ♪   ߷  ♀ 投稿 ♀  04:43, 25 June 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.