Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Through a Glass, Darkly (I et speil, i en gåte)


 * 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. -- Cirt (talk) 00:03, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

Through a Glass, Darkly (I et speil, i en gåte)

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

Non notable book. Burpelson AFB (talk) 03:15, 18 August 2010 (UTC)  Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:03, 25 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep appears to have been made into a notable movie. I note the Norwegian WP article, from which it may be possible to expand ours a bit. Andrew Lenahan -  St ar bli nd  03:36, 18 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Norway-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 16:02, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 16:02, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep article for movie and author show that this is notable by association, I imagine their are plenty of sources, Sadads (talk) 16:06, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
 *  Delete , imagination is a wonderful thing, but it doesn't produce references. A quick google produced no coverage although I freely admit searching is made difficult by common use of the phrase and that there are other books bearing the same title. Reads like an advert. Nuujinn (talk) 11:04, 24 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.


 * Delete for the following reasons:
 * Contains copied material from Amazon which means the article cannot be released under CC-BY-SA 3.0 as the contributor will not own the copyright to this text, Amazon will.
 * Reads like an advert
 * Manual of Style: no lead, important wikipedia link to author in Links section.
 * Only external link is to imdb, a movie site, not a book site.
 * No references.
 * Link for movie leads to 1961 film Through a Glass Darkly (film), not the 2008 film that the article claims was based on this book. The article for the film mentioned does not state that it was based on a book.
 * Title includes a translation into the book's original language
 * The article is a stub which, upon addressing the points above, would be no longer than a paragraph and, I believe, could never be properly expanded due to lack of references.
 * Being made into a film does not make a book notable. If users insist on keeping the article simply for this reason, I recommend merging it into an article for the 2008 film. In fact, films are not automatically notable. There'd need to be (preferably multiple) reliable external sources available confirming the notability of any film before we'd include it on Wikipedia.
 * Just mentioning the policies and guidelines which this article fails: WP:OR, WP:Lead, WP:V, WP:ADS, WP:Names

--tb240904 Talk Contribs 01:05, 25 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Most of these issues are easily repaired and are not valid grounds for deletion. An article fails WP:V and is WP:OR if sources cannot be found, but in this case they are found easily enough. --Lambiam 13:18, 27 August 2010 (UTC)


 * Keep A few clicks on the Norwegian wikipedia showed that the book won a national award in the year it was released. The other problems, including a page move, can be fixed by normal editing. Edgepedia (talk) 13:20, 26 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment, wikipedia is not considered a reliable source. I found this link to the list of prize winners, the author is listed, but not the book. Perhaps a better source can be found. -- Nuujinn (talk) 14:28, 26 August 2010 (UTC)
 * is a source for the film, giving international sales for the book of two million. Edgepedia (talk) 15:41, 26 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment, that appears to be passing mention rather than significant coverage, and number of copies sold is not a criteron of WP:NB. I think the award is the best bet, but we lack a source that says the book won an award. Nuujinn (talk) 15:50, 26 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment A German translation won amongst others, the 1996 Buxtehude Bulle. I've also referenced a review of the film. According to WP:NB #3, if the film's notable, the book's notable but I see no reason for two articles at the moment. I've restructured it accordingly. Edgepedia (talk) 16:49, 26 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Question, do you believe that you have established that the film is notable? I'm not sure it is, but I do like the notion of making this an article about the film, and including information about the book--that would seem to be a more substantial article all around. Nuujinn (talk) 23:44, 26 August 2010 (UTC)

Question I don't understand why a film that has won national award as the best children's film would not be notable. Edgepedia (talk) 06:25, 27 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment, I'm sorry to be so dense, but I don't see I et speil, i en gåte or Through a Glass Darkly listed in that link, and it appears that that list only goes up to 2006, while the film was released in 2009. And I don't read Norwegian very well (although I can read it a bit), so I'm not really in a position to evaluate what the Amanda award is in the first place. We need better sources to establish notability. Nuujinn (talk) 11:07, 27 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Sorry, I don't know why I gave you that link. This is an uptodate one.
 * Keep. It is easy enough to find sources in Norwegian for the claim that the book won the 1993 Booksellers prize: Bokhandlerforeningen (the Booksellers Association), Norsk Biografisk Leksikon (Norwegian Biographical Encyclopedia). Here is a link to a page (in Norwegian) on the website of the Norwegian Filmfestival showing that the film won the Amanda Award 2009 for Best Children and Youth Film, and another one (in English) by the Norwegian Film Institute. The book has also been published in an English translation: And here is a link for the claim that the book won the 1996 Buxtehude Bull.  --Lambiam 13:04, 27 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep, Lambian, thank you, those will do nicely. Nuujinn 14:11, 27 August 2010 (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.