Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Garbage and Recycling: Opposing Viewpoints

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 redirect to Opposing Viewpoints series. postdlf (talk) 16:26, 28 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Garbage and Recycling: Opposing Viewpoints

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

While the series is notable, this book is not. I found no significant coverage to make this pass WP:BK. SL93 (talk) 22:28, 14 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 23:19, 14 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Environment-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 23:19, 14 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Opposing Viewpoints series. I have no true opinion as of yet on the notability of the series as a whole (although the article is lacking in sources), but this book just doesn't have any notability separate from the series as a whole. I couldn't really find any coverage for this edition of the book, although I did find a review for the re-edited edition. However, that's not enough to give notability for this book as a whole, so redirect. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 03:55, 15 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Dusti^{*Let's talk!*} 01:58, 21 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect - This and all the other books in Category:Books in the Opposing Viewpoints series to Opposing Viewpoints series. The mother article should also be greatly expanded and not include a list of all the books, which would take up much too much room. öBrambleberry of RiverClan 14:50, 21 August 2013 (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.