Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Rape of the A*P*E*


 * 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The result was   Keep as withdrawn. &mdash; Maggot Syn 09:58, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

The Rape of the A*P*E*

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

PROD objected to (see talk page) so removed on objector's behalf. The book itself may or may not be notable but this article is unreferenced and, as an analytical review, is entirely original research. Therefore it either needs a complete rewrite or, failing that, should redirect to the author article Alan Sherman, where it is mentioned. Ros0709 (talk) 19:04, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions.   --  Beloved  Freak  19:20, 2 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Neutral. I think I'm on shaky ground here, but here's my 2 cents. This is a very new user (apparently) who has made an honest attempt to contribute to wikipedia. I agree totally with what Ros0709 says above, but since this isn't obvious spam, self promotion, etc. maybe some "kid gloves" treatment (i.e., cutting a little slack) is warranted? I put a lengthy message to the author (I think - wasn't signed in the discussion for the page but seems to be the original contributor - see Talk:The Rape of the A*P*E*) with all sorts of suggestions. For the record, this is an extremely notable work (or was when it was written) that got a lot of coverage, reviews, and analysis (still gets some). I think, if left up, it might accrue some TLC (e.g., from me - just not now). Like I said, 2 cents. -- Quartermaster (talk) 21:24, 2 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  Skomorokh  00:02, 9 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Comment - Ought to redirected to Allan Sherman if not kept, rather than Alan Sherman. Going to see if I can find any good information/sources to maintain this article with. -Rushyo (talk) 00:34, 9 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep Google News has some results but most are behind the pay screen. I can get copies off of proquest of the New York Times, Chicago Tribune, and LATimes ones to flesh out and source the article, but am not particularly willing to go through all of them if people don't think it's going to be a keep.  That said, I did already pull up the LATimes A wheeze over sex and it mentions that he did "a two-week national tour of radio talk shows" on which he met with "five or six interviewers a day."  We don't have great sourcing for the 1970s, but the combination of scores of radio shows featuring him and his book combined with reviews in big national papers like NYTimes, LATimes and the Chicago Tribune makes me think it's notable. Vickser (talk) 01:11, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
 * And if it effects anyone's vote, the LATimes Wheeze article was on page A1. I wasn't alive in 1973, but I know that today at least front page book reviews are extremely rare. Vickser (talk) 01:15, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep. I don't feel strongly about it and, as such, the effort deserves the benefit of the doubt. - Raj Krishnamurthy (talk) 02:37, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep - I think this is a notability does not expire situation --T-rex 04:48, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment. Nomination struck. The article has been rewritten and referenced. Ros0709 (talk) 06:31, 9 July 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.