Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/How to Buy, Sell, and Profit on eBay (2nd nomination)

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) Jack Frost (talk) 07:46, 24 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

How to Buy, Sell, and Profit on eBay

[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)

trivial reviews DGG ( talk ) 11:28, 9 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. Megan Barris (Lets talk📧) 11:34, 9 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. Megan Barris (Lets talk📧) 11:35, 9 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Keep as meets WP:BOOKCRIT #1: "The book has been the subject[1] of two or more non-trivial[2] published works appearing in sources that are independent of the book itself.[3] This can include published works in all forms, such as newspaper articles, other books, television documentaries, bestseller lists,[4] and reviews." The reviews in The Boston Globe and Booklist, the book reviewing arm of the American Library Association, could hardly be called trivial. DiamondRemley39 (talk) 13:57, 9 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Weak delete - I agree that the reviews aren't trivial--or, at least, they're from RS. A how to guide on eBay from 2005 that is most likely very outdated? This may be most notable as a relic from the mainstreaming of eBay in the early and mid- 2000s. Caro7200 (talk) 20:39, 9 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- @Caro7200: Can you align your weak delete vote with anything in a notability policy? A book being niche and outdated is not grounds for deletion. Thanks, DiamondRemley39 (talk) 22:05, 9 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, to the "Coverage notes" aspect: this book most closely resembles an instruction manual. It's not strictly a memoir. It's not a business history of eBay. It's closer to For Dummies, The Idiot's Guide to, or guides about old versions of Windows, etc. Caro7200 (talk) 13:35, 10 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Just as when DGG nominated it last time, I find this to be a weak keep. The Boston Globe and Booklist reviews (which I accessed through ebsco) feel substantial enough to meet NBOOK. However, if this book were deleted it would not trouble me in the least - it lacks the sort of WP:SUSTAINED coverage notable topics should have and is a pretty clear "no" for me when answering the question posed by the 10 year test. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 02:09, 17 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, DMySon 06:08, 17 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Reviews in multiple reliable sources are sufficient to satisfy WP:BOOKCRIT. Caro7200's argument that that guideline doesn't apply (I think that's what's being argued) is confusing – if WP:BOOKCRIT didn't apply, WP:GNG would, and this meets that too. – Arms & Hearts (talk) 17:46, 17 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: I added a link to the Miami Herald review. I think the three reviews are enough to satisfy WP:BOOKCRIT. — Toughpigs (talk) 02:51, 19 July 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.