Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Folklore of Assam

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 speedy keep. Clearly my view is against consensus here. Meets WP:NBOOK. (non-admin closure) AleatoryPonderings (talk) 18:55, 26 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Folklore of Assam[edit]

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

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

Apparently non-notable book by a notable author. I would have redirected to Jogesh Das, but that would seem misleading as presumably searchers of that term would be looking to learn about the folklore of Assam. AleatoryPonderings (talk) 05:00, 26 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. AleatoryPonderings (talk) 05:00, 26 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. AleatoryPonderings (talk) 05:00, 26 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Keep the book was published by a publishing house under government's ministry, that should establish some notability on its own.Georgiamarlins (talk) 08:56, 26 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: crawling through the listings on Google Scholar shows this title has many citations. Clearly a reference text for other studies on Assam and its culture. -- Whiteguru (talk) 11:12, 26 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Question. Does WP:NBOOK say anything in particular about being published by the government or having many citations? The best I can find is WP:OLDBOOK and WP:TEXTBOOKS, neither of which seems particularly helpful here. I recognize that common sense should prevail, but there are, after all, many highly cited reference works out there—what makes this one, in particular, notable? (Incidentally, I don't think this book is that highly cited: Scholar gives 32 citations.) AleatoryPonderings (talk) 14:21, 26 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: I see the book cited in Indian and Japanese Folklore: An Introductory Assessment (1984), Tribes and Castes of Manipur: Description and Select Bibliography (1992), Khasi-Jaintia Folklore: Context, Discourse, and History (2004), A History of Intoxication: Opium in Assam, 1800–1959 (2019), The Music and Musical Instruments of North Eastern India (2003), and there's more. I'm not super familiar with sources of people writing about people writing about Indian folklore, but I think common sense can prevail here. If there are many highly cited reference works out there, then it's not a bad idea for them to have Wikipedia articles. — Toughpigs (talk) 18:25, 26 September 2020 (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.