Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion/Starving the Monkeys

"A disputed speedy and disputed prod (the latter removed without apparent improvement)"

The above statement is incorrect. See the talk page for the article for justification for the author to remove the PROD tag.

Again, the book addressed in the article contains strong political content. Removal for taste (and ultimately, notability is a subjective matter by Wikipedia's own standards), would indicate censorship in this forum. If Wikipedia allows any complaint to remove articles that have strong political content, then this venue is worthless as an open forum.

It remains to be seen whether logic or reason prevails, or whether Wikipedia is a thin veneer for censorship.

The fact that some community members object SO STRONGLY and have objected SO QUICKLY after the posting of the original article indicates notability on its own accord, doesn't it? This when there are plenty of meaningless articles on Wikipedia that get no challenge at all.

I find it interesting that when the first complaint (not-notable) was so easily swatted aside by referencing Wikipedia's own book-notability criterion, that another complaint, this one subjective, immediately arose to take its place. This may make the book's author correct in many ways ...

LandHawg (talk) 21:54, 29 June 2009 (UTC)