Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Travels of a Republican Radical in Search of Hot Water


 * 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 speedy keep‎__EXPECTED_UNCONNECTED_PAGE__. Nomination withdrawn and no support for Deletion. Liz Read! Talk! 21:31, 18 April 2024 (UTC)

Travels of a Republican Radical in Search of Hot Water

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

PROD was contested in 2011, but there have been no meaningful changes to the article since then besides the addition of a book cover image. WP:BEFORE provides no direct information on the book besides a few advertisements and passing mentions, and some extremely brief quotations or citations in works that describe the whole of H. G. Wells' career. The quotation it is "best known for" appears once in the literature relevant to it that I could find (which I do not have access to):  Recon  rabbit  20:27, 11 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions.  Recon  rabbit  20:27, 11 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Keep: Some fairly decent length reviews (coverage?) in The Daily Telegraph, The Hopewell News and NYT. ARandomName123 (talk)Ping me! 20:52, 11 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Keep, or Redirect to H. G. Wells bibliography, where it is mentioned. I find many google scholar hits that are likely related to the quotation mentioned in the nom's statement, but I don't think any of these are likely to show notability; I expect they're all just direct quotes or passing mentions. I do think this is plausibly notable, but what I'm finding (aside from the contemporary reviews noted above) are discussions of the contents of the book in service of biographies of Wells, rather than literary criticism (or whatever) in its own right. This article/redirect would probably be a good place to expand on some details of Wells's life that would be too much detail for his main article. Since, as the nom notes, no one has done that in more than a decade, I think a redirect is fine for now. has a couple of pages loosely related to the book starting around pg 382; this seems typical of the scholarly/biographical use of this book. I don't think it would be a good idea to write an article solely on the strength of the reviews found by ARandomName123. -- asilvering (talk) 21:01, 11 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Comment: As noted by asilvering, most of what I could find in regards to this work were quotes from it or references to it in service of demonstrating something about Wells' points of view. Another essay that quotes the book fairly often, though never making a direct discussion of the book, rather using it as example to talk about Wells: does this confer the kind of coverage that could be used at all to discuss the book itself? It doesn't look like it to me. Also, Google brings up a one-sentence review in an unrelated article from 1940 in the Indian Express:   Recon  rabbit  02:54, 12 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Following the elucidation of sources from TWL and Newspapers.com I would like to withdraw this nomination. Currently I do not have the time-requirement to access the Library but will work on integrating these sources into the article once I gain access in a couple weeks. In the future I will refrain from making any further deletion proposals or nominations until after I have searched for and reviewed sources from TWL as this was a blind spot I didn't fully realize until now, especially in the non-natural sciences articles. Recon  rabbit  13:33, 12 April 2024 (UTC)
 * @Reconrabbit: I was planning to add them in once this AfD is concluded, so I can do it later today. If you want, I can email you images of TWL sources. ARandomName123 (talk)Ping me! 14:33, 12 April 2024 (UTC)
 * @ARandomName123: If you think it would be beneficial to email me images of your sources, I would appreciate it. Though, if there're still issues with the article in a month, I'll be able to check myself and make any of the requisite improvements from the library, so it may not be worth your effort. Recon  rabbit  14:54, 12 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Keep. Meets WP:NBOOK via the sources from ARandomName123 and these additional newspaper sources:, , . Jfire (talk) 04:50, 12 April 2024 (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.