Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Then I was Guided (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   merge to Muhammad al-Tijani. J04n(talk page) 01:49, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

Then I was Guided (book)

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

While this book is quite popular among English-speaking Shia Muslims, none of the sources which can be found on the web about this book - both those with positive views and negative ones - are realible or neutral. The book is not particularly well known outside of the small niche market of Shia Muslims in Anglophone countries, and really has no support for its notability - I am confident that reliable, verifiable sources cannot be found for the book. Additionally, the article's creator seems to have made an account on Wikipedia in 2008, created this article, uploaded the picture and disappeared. It's possible that a big fan of the book or author simply wanted to make a fan page without learning Wikipedia's notability guidelines. MezzoMezzo (talk) 11:09, 24 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Islam-related deletion discussions. MezzoMezzo (talk) 11:15, 24 February 2013 (UTC)


 * Keep. Naming_conventions_(books) states:
 * '' Ask yourself if several libraries or bookshops, or a no-subscription website have a copy of the book, so that other wikipedians can easily consult the book, or at least have access to on-line or press-published reviews of the book. Usually, books with an ISBN-number and/or availability in a couple dozen of libraries and/or a Project Gutenberg type website, and with a notability above that of an average cookbook or programmers manual would qualify.


 * I think it's notable and verifiable, and worthy of inclusion as this book has a ISBN AND is "availability in a couple dozen of libraries", AND also being available for full download on several sites. Also, the book is notable enough to be republished by several publishers.-- Sayed Mohammad Faiz Haider t c s 15:03, 24 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 23:20, 24 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Just to mention that the book originally was written in Arabic and then it was translated in several languages, in English, Farsi, Arabic, French, Urdu, etc.-- Sayed Mohammad Faiz Haider t c s 07:11, 25 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Shall we just merge this to Muhammad al-Tijani as was the case with Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Shi'a: The Real Followers of the Sunnah? I think the same goes for all other entries on the subject's books; plus, the article on the subject (who is definitely notable himself) is lacking in sources, so perhaps these merges could beef up his own article. MezzoMezzo (talk) 05:12, 4 March 2013 (UTC)


 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, KTC (talk) 11:05, 4 March 2013 (UTC)


 * Naming_conventions_(books) does not contain any such text, or even a section called that, and hasn't been edited since the comment above was left. Where is this text from?  Morwen (Talk) 15:59, 4 March 2013 (UTC)


 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Mediran  ( t  •  c ) 09:54, 11 March 2013 (UTC)



Just to finish this out with some sort of consensus, another book by the author, and the result of the discussion ended up going from delete to merge with the author's article. The article for this book itself has no references, and its presence in libraries isn't enough to support notability in and of itself. If we switch from deleting to merging and keeping the article's history like with the other book (there are still two plus this one up for deletion for the same reasons), would that generate some form of consensus and finish the issue? MezzoMezzo (talk) 09:36, 18 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete Notability not established per WP:GNG or BOOK. Above arguments OTHERSTUFF DavidTTTaylor (talk) 14:06, 18 March 2013 (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.