Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Force of Reason

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 keep. (non-admin closure) Steven Zhang ^{The clock is ticking....} 00:13, 7 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Force of Reason

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

No indication of notability per WP:N. Cs32en Talk to me 12:29, 30 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Like "The book was a bestseller in Europe" for example? Fair enough, it isn't cited but as per WP:BEFORE you could try that Google Books thingy (best combining author name with book title) to see various published discussions of this very book. AllyD (talk) 17:29, 30 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

If you have a reliable source for the assertion that the "book was a bestseller in Europe", please add it to the article. Cs32en Talk to me 17:42, 30 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Already done, 1 min before you asked. AllyD (talk)

Maybe 30 seconds, as I had checked the article before adding my comment. This may be a good start, yet we need to present the book based on information taken from secondary, reliable sources. The statement that the book was a bestseller is not enough for doing this. Cs32en Talk to me 18:06, 30 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Clearly notable book that led to a well-known court-case: see the refs now added to the article, or others that can be found such as New York Times. AllyD (talk) 17:45, 30 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Book was a bestseller and led to a court case that's discussed in books and such. The court case should be mentioned in the article, though. Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 21:35, 30 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. — • Gene93k (talk) 15:02, 1 August 2011 (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.