Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/How to read Donald Duck
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This is the current revision of this page, as edited by MalnadachBot (talk | contribs) at 19:59, 19 May 2022 (Fixed Lint errors. (Task 12)). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this version.Revision as of 19:59, 19 May 2022 by MalnadachBot (talk | contribs) (Fixed Lint errors. (Task 12))
(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
- 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The result was Withdrawn per sources. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • (Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP) 18:16, 18 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- How to read Donald Duck (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)
Original research no secondary sources save for one review. A search for the English and Spanish titles turned up very little information. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • (Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP) 01:19, 18 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Strong Keep. A classic essay in South American politics. Not too many hits indeed; however, this source alone establishes more than enough notability for this book. -- Blanchardb -Me•MyEars•MyMouth- timed 01:42, 18 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. -- Fabrictramp | talk to me 02:05, 18 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Chile-related deletion discussions. -- Fabrictramp | talk to me 02:05, 18 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Comics and animation-related deletion discussions. —Juzhong (talk) 05:28, 18 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep, where were you searching? Try google scholar, google news archive, and maybe the Encylopedia Britannica next time. Juzhong (talk) 05:11, 18 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep as per Google news search. Just needs a clean up though and more third party citations. Michellecrisp (talk) 06:55, 18 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep per Juzhong and Michellecrisp. SMSpivey (talk) 10:05, 18 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- 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.