Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Euthanasia: Opposing Viewpoints

Euthanasia: Opposing Viewpoints

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:NBOOK. It is briefly covered in a listing in an issue of Issues in Law & Medicine, but not significantly, and there is an actual review in Booklist available on ProQuest, but that is only one and NBOOK needs two. It is part of the Opposing Viewpoints series, which is notable from my searches. Redirect there? PARAKANYAA (talk) 00:25, 15 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. PARAKANYAA (talk) 00:25, 15 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: There seems to be an earlier book with the same name [1], as shown, from 1989. The book is widely cited [2], [3], [4], [5], could it be covered by an academic notability criteria? Being mentioned in at least three sources from different years implies some critical notice. Oaktree b (talk) 02:48, 15 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
There is WP:TEXTBOOKS, which suggests that academic book notability is less restrictive than other books (which I agree with), however that is applied inconsistently in practice and I am not sure if that precludes having more than one review. PARAKANYAA (talk) 02:57, 15 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]