Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Scientology Handbook

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 delete. Wizardman 02:21, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The Scientology Handbook

Article appears to be a simple advertisement with link to both the website to buy the book, and the online version. It uses 2 lines of text to explain the history of the book, and spends alot more on the asthetic qualities of the origional version. Coffeepusher (talk) 23:01, 26 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Then fix it. This book is written by Hubbard and Google book shows plenty of hits, evidence of its notability. Just because it is a book about Scientology doesn't mean it warrants exclusion from Wikipedia. This article can easily be salvaged, do it rather than abuse the nomination process. Hazillow (talk) 23:18, 26 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comment It isn't being nominated because it is "about" scientology. We have plenty of books and screenplays writen by L. Ron Hubbard that I havn't nominated for deletion. I am actually slightly offended at the implication that this AFD is a POV attack on scientology. A Google hit list is a tool that can be used to establish notiblility, however that in itself dosn't make an artile notible. The article itself, based on the content within the article isn't notable.Coffeepusher (talk) 23:26, 26 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It also Failed the google scholar test, which gives a better indicatior of notability in published works.Coffeepusher (talk) 19:27, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. In a search of news archives, I found several brief mentions of the book in passing, but I could not find sources, book reviews, etc., that significantly reviewed the book in secondary, WP:RS/WP:V sources. In a search of books, again, I could find no other WP:RS/WP:V books that discuss The Scientology Handbook in any great detail or depth of discussion, just mentions in passing or briefly in a sentence or less. I was unable to find any reviews of the book in a search on Infotrac. In a search of archived newspaper articles on Infotrac, found some brief mentions of Scientology ad campaigns and promotional pieces from people affiliated with the Church of Scientology, but again, no secondary WP:RS/WP:V sources that either directly review the subject matter, or analyze/discuss the work in depth. If anyone else has found secondary WP:RS/WP:V sources that discuss the work in some depth, I have not been able to find any in several news archives and other sources. Cirt (talk) 23:24, 26 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. The criteria for the notability of books are listed (logically enough) at Wikipedia:Notability (books)#Criteria. I honestly can't say that it meets any of them. Perhaps the closest is #5, "The book's author is so historically significant that any of his or her written works may be considered notable", but the Handbook is merely based on the works of L. Ron Hubbard; it's not actually by him, despite the attribution on the cover. It's basically an anthology of a number of his writings plus a good deal of padding - note that its first edition was published only in 1994 (Hubbard died in 1986). I don't think criterion #5 could realistically be applied to an anthology of this nature. -- ChrisO (talk) 23:41, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Not notable. No point in giving it an advertising page.--Fahrenheit451 (talk) 19:09, 2 March 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.