Jump to content

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Walking Trees

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Walking Trees

[edit]

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

Walking Trees (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Appears to be a promotional Wikipedia article JustMakeTheAccount (talk) 02:58, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • KEEP - This is a standard Wikipedia book review, not an article. I've done a number of book reviews for Wikipedia, and the format on this is pretty close to how Wikipedia prefers those reviews. Here's an example: Ladies of the Lights. Also see Wikipedia:WikiProject Books. — Maile (talk) 04:18, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Literature, Education, and New York. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:05, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • KEEP as per Maile --Captain-tucker (talk) 11:14, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Redirect to the author. Wikipedia is not advertising-space. We have articles on significant books, not "reviews". This particular article is the typical publisher's back-cover content (short summary and a handful of glowing reviewer quotes) cast in Wikipedia format. Short of adding the price and sticking a discount label on it, I can't see how we could possibly make an article more promotional. More formally, my opinion is that a book is wikipedia-notable if it attracts lasting independent interest (i.e. something beyond the handful of reviews in library/educational magazines and journals at the time of publishing, which are things every book generates, because that's what publicists arrange). Although I've no doubt about the quality of the book and its author, I can't find evidence of lasting independent discussion of it, merely listings in all the normal book sellers (amazon, abe etc.). I'd suggest handling the entire series in one article, or redirecting to the author. Elemimele (talk) 12:11, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Well, again, Wikipedia:WikiProject Books is the guideline for how to do this. And Walking Trees is within that. And, by the way, welcome to Wikipedia. I see you are fairly new. — Maile (talk) 12:59, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    well, to be fair, I'm not that new, and I'm only attempting to follow the criteria in WP:BOOKCRIT. In this field, reviews in the first year of a book's life are almost always prompted by the activities of a publicist employed by the publisher, which means that although the opinions of the reviewer are independent, the existence of the review is not. Elemimele (talk) 14:33, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
something beyond the handful of reviews in library/educational magazines and journals at the time of publishing, which are things every book generates, because that's what publicists arrange If you're interested, there's a couple of discussions about this in WT:NBOOK archives 6 and 7. ARandomName123 (talk)Ping me! 16:39, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Walking_Trees&oldid=1289599576"