Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Know-It-All: One Man's Humble Quest to Become the Smartest Person in the World

 This page is an archive of the proposed deletion of the article below. Further comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or on a Votes for Undeletion nomination). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was keep -- Francs2000 | Talk 11:34, 7 August 2005 (UTC)

The Know-It-All: One Man's Humble Quest to Become the Smartest Person in the World
No vote. This was restored (I presume) as a result of the VfU debate, where most voters requested it be listed here. -Splash 17:21, 25 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Real, non-vanity-press book. Given the stubbiness of this article and A.J. Jacobs (who appears to be a notable journalist), it might be best to simply Merge this into the author's article. I wouldn't oppose keeping it outright. android  79  17:28, July 25, 2005 (UTC)
 * Merge Interesting description, not in A. J. Jacobs. Septentrionalis 17:37, 25 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Merge or failing that, Keep CanadianCaesar 19:13, 25 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Merge - I don't see the need to keep what little can be said beyond what is already in the author's article. - T&#949;x  &#964;  ur&#949;  21:34, 25 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Merge to A.J. Jacobs.-Poli (talk &bull; contribs) 23:49, 2005 July 25 (UTC)
 * Keep, or failing that merge. Worth keeping just to cite P.J. O'Rourke's endorsement: "The Know-It-All is a terrific book. It's a lot shorter than the encyclopedia, and funnier, and you'll remember more of it. Plus, if it falls off the shelf onto your head, you'll live." --Tony Sidaway|Talk 02:29, 26 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep, seems like people become deletionists because they want to be able to read the entire wikipedia. Kappa 13:38, 26 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep and expand your horizons. &mdash;RaD Man (talk) 14:46, 27 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep, the subject is notable enough on its own. --Sn0wflake 00:12, 2 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. Yes, it's a simplistic stub at present, but I think any book that sells widely is deserving of an article -- there's no reason to restrict ourselves to canon literature, and we certainly haven't done so in the past. Jwrosenzweig 00:51, 2 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Merge, Pavel Vozenilek 02:56, 2 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep - Andrew Denton interviewed the author about this book on his Enough Rope show on ABC. Notable. - Ta bu shi da yu 03:50, 2 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep - A subject of such special interest to all encyclopaedians, should have an article of its own. Lumos3 13:28, 2 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. Why would you merge? Books always have their own articles by convention. It allows linking to the book title, adding pictures of the book cover, etc... Stbalbach 13:46, 2 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep; notable enough. --Merovingian (t) (c) 08:16, August 3, 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep; Books have their own articles, notable enough. Fbergo 08:20, 3 August 2005 (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 an undeletion request). No further edits should be made to this page.