Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Internationalist Books

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. —Quarl ^(talk) 2007-02-11 06:20Z

Internationalist Books

Possibly not notable enough organisation. Opening AFD for community consensus. No Vote exolon 01:16, 5 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Article is not cited, and appears to be about one single store (not a franchise). P.B. Pilhet / Talk 01:21, 5 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Subjects of Wikipedia articles must be notable, as explained in the notability guidelines. The article here does not claim or demonstrate notability. --N Shar 01:24, 5 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Quite clearly an advertisement for a non-notable store. Chairman S. Talk ^Contribs 02:06, 5 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete no assertion of notability. Resolute 02:35, 5 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - no assertion of notability and no sources except the store's own website. Natalie 03:01, 5 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Clean-up On notability: Internationalist Books & Community Center is an infoshop, comparable to the Iron Rail in New Orleans. It is not a franchise, but that is intentional. Internationalist Books supports and is affiliated with various local radical groups, hosting a weekly 'Queer Youth Night' and sponsoring a Prison Books Collective (which publishes the National Prisoner Resource List and serves the Southeastern United States). Internationalist Books is one of only three resources listed for North Carolina in Slingshot's extensive Radical Contact List. IBooks provides a wealth of information and resources not available elsewhere locally, specializing in alternative news. Available resources include a free news rack, a wide variety of alternative and radical magazines (few of which are available in "notable" franchises like Barnes_&_Noble), and an extraordinary selection of self-published Zines.

Please keep in mind that by deleting this article, you will be saying that this vital radical resource -- for which hundreds of people have willingly volunteered their time over the years -- is of less importance than Zinc_Oxide_Eugenol and Kazuma_Kuwabara (two randomly-accessed articles). Digitoxic 03:35, 5 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comparable Infoshops on Wikipedia (from the Infoshop article)

Delete non-notable, no matter what quality or quantity the amount of effort put forth. /Blaxthos 09:12, 5 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Keep as seen above, many other infoshops have entries -- are they non-notable as well? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 66.57.14.174 (talk) 15:17, 5 February 2007 (UTC).— 66.57.14.174 (talk) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]

Keep/Clean-up Article has now been cited. Article has now also removed much of the language which made it seem "ad-like" - the entry is now much more encyclopedic in nature. Content has been added which shows the scope of the organization is national and international, important and unique. I would like to point out that the "delete" votes here seem to be a snowballing effect, not viewing the article on its own merits, rather basing opinions on previous "delete votes". Example: "non-notable, no matter what quality or quantity the amount of effort put forth" - if you draw this conclusion out, this could be said of Wikipedia (which is a collection of quality efforts). If you look at it now that is has been cleaned up, objectively, you will see this is just about as 'wikipedia' as things go - a collective organization which only exists because of the communal input and efforts of a group of people.

Outside recognition as measure of notability: Duke University Library, an internationally renowned organization, has collected and archived the papers of the founder of Internationalist Books, as well as the organizational records, in its Rare Books and Manuscripts Collection: Duke University Library collection This is evidence that the organization is a unique phenomenon, which deserves to be noted.

If time is a measure of notability: Note that of all of the other entries in noteworthy infoshops listed, only two (Jura and Wooden Shoe) were founded prior to 1981 - the founding date of the Internationalist. Not to mention that Jura and Wooden Shoe exist in much larger markets than Chapel Hill, NC. To exist as an independent bookstore for 25 years in a small college town, and to be the only remaining independent bookstore in downtown Chapel Hill, is intrinsically notable (not to mention the history, the outside articles, and all the other measures that comply with the notability guidelines).

Note also, if comparing to the other infoshop entries, that many do not have external links other than their own websites. Here we have a number of outside links, which is a major part of notability - from the the notability guidelines.

Finally, a quick anecdote: I recently spoke with a friend in San Francisco. We have not spoken in about ten years. When she learned that I had moved to Chapel Hill the first thing that she asked me was: "Have you been to the Internationalist?"--Citizenplastic 15:30, 5 February 2007 (UTC)— Citizenplastic (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]

Keep, per above. This is a well known, long standing establishment. - N1h1l 20:31, 5 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
keep this is N, and there seems to be adequate demonstration. The excellent political reasons why one might think it important are not relevant--and they are not needed, for its N in the ordinary way.04:49, 6 February 2007 (UTC).
Keep - notable as per references now added to the page. --Zeborah 05:27, 6 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep First i would like to say that this does not appear to an "international" entity, despite the name ("internationalist" refers to a world view, not extent of entity) but is rather an important local resource. The standard of WP:LOCAL should be considered here. It should be notable under this standard. The Independent Weekly and Daily Tar Heel cites more than satisfy WP:V criteria.Edivorce 00:12, 7 February 2007 (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.