Talk:Jack the Ripper, Light-Hearted Friend

	Books portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Books. To participate in the project, please visit its page, where you can join the project and discuss matters related to book articles. To use this banner, please refer to the documentation. To improve this article, please refer to the relevant guideline for the type of work.BooksWikipedia:WikiProject BooksTemplate:WikiProject BooksBook articles
	This article has been marked as needing an infobox.

London Low‑importance

	London portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject London, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of London on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.LondonWikipedia:WikiProject LondonTemplate:WikiProject LondonLondon-related articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

This article needs to be deleted. This is a load of crap. I'm not a fan of Alice in Wonderland or Lewis Carroll and I believe that Carroll may well have been perverted sexually but the idea that he was Jack the Ripper is ridiculous. --Prb4 03:44, 15 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This is an encyclopedia, not a rant about whatever you want. The article mentions that a book was released and explains what was in it and why it's not taken seriously. There's no reason to delete it. 216.165.158.7 09:46, 15 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This article has become an absurd public joke, thanks largely to Reddit.com. The "Orenthal-James Simpson" anagram, clever though it may be, is ludricrous. This article nees to be deleted. I'd do it myself, but I know bots will fight me. --Protophobic 24:42, 27 November2007 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Protophobic (talk • contribs)

This article does not need to be deleted... you need an actual reason to put something up for deletion. You don't have one other than not liking it. The article is sourced, is about a topic that made headlines worldwide when it was released, gives full info on the topic, etc. DreamGuy (talk) 14:55, 28 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There's an article on Protocols of the Elders of Zion, a book making ridiculous claims, so this should stand too. It's not as if the article's existence lends any legitimacy to the claims. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.22.53.24 (talk) 06:55, 30 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Notability

The standard for notability for books is "multiple, non-trivial published works whose sources are independent of the book itself", "a major literary award", being made into a film, and a couple of others not applicable here. None of these seem to apply. Kenilworth Terrace (talk) 20:51, 29 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]