Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Assassin's Mace

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 speedily deleted (WP:CSD#G7) by Shell Kinney (talk • contribs • blocks • protects • deletions • moves • rights). Non-admin close. cab 03:02, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Assassin's Mace

Assassin's Mace (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

Procedural nomination -- a prod was contested. The topic of the article does not seem to meet notability for books. Iknowyourider (t c) 23:41, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

• This book is amazing. It brings to light the Shashou Jiang. Check out this link [1] The person who recommended this book for deletion is obviously not aware of its popularity or the subject matter. Apparently they delete just to delete. Why would they delete this book and not any of the others? What an ignoramus to delete this novel. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.187.62.236 (talk)

• That's not ignoramus at all. The book just doesn't meet Wikipedia's notability guidelines. We can't include everything here. I'm sure it's a good book, it's just not notable enough. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(((Broken clamshells • Otter chirps)))} 00:01, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

• This is my favorite book to come out in a long time. It is also neat because it was my first article on wikipedia that I was able to put up. If you want to take it down go ahead. I will never come to wikipedia again. You guys are biased or something. Why are you deleting this post? You said you want to have a discussion about it. Lets discuss. I did the best I could with putting up my first article. Add to it if you like. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 72.187.62.236 (talk • contribs) 00:18, 20 Jul 2007 (UTC)

• Comment: the contester of the prod was kind enough to (ahem) post some claimed sources directly to my User page. The sources are here: [2] [3]. While the articles do contain content on the phrase "assassin's mace", they do not contain any content related to the book under consideration. Iknowyourider (t c) 00:29, 20 July 2007 (UTC)
• Strong Delete "Assassin's mace" is a notable concept discussed in various Chinese and English sources and may deserve an article; the book "Assassin's Mace" by Evan Pedone is clearly non-notable (no independent book reviews, etc.), with 25 GHits [4], printed by PublishAmerica (close enough to a vanity house as to make no difference), and the top non-retailer, non-wikipedia hit is the author's MySpace page. cab 00:36, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

CaliforniaAliBaba you are a numbskull. I have already said you can delete this article if you guys like. It was my first article on wikipedia and not a big deal to me. I just liked the dang book.

You know instead of attacking one of your users which I feel this is you should of pointed me to Wikinews. You guys have a news site for stuff that is temporary. Obviously this is a new book. God forbid I post anything else on your site and it comes under this kind of scrutiny.

I created this article being a fan of a book and at the time respecting wikipedia. After this debate and the lynching by wikipedia editors I say take it down. You have my permission. delete the article. You guys obviously have nothing better to do. Take it down. It really is not that big of a deal. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 72.187.62.236 (talk • contribs) 00:53, 20 Jul 2007 (UTC)

Comment: The only one posing this discussion as "us versus them" is, well, you. (And now, I suppose, me. But I digress.) The suggested deletion of the article is nothing personal against you, and is nothing against the book. It simply does not meet Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion. Wikipedia's goal is to build an encyclopedia -- and that means it can't include absolutely everything. Newcomers do sometimes find Wikipedia's processes to be somewhat intimidating, but to be fair, it's all documented, and in fairly simple terms. Cheers, Iknowyourider (t c) 00:58, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

• Iknowyourrider I appreciate you saying it is not an attack against me. I understand. I cant argue some of the things you have said because I dont even know what you guys are talking about. I am ok with you taking down the article if it doesnt meet your standards.

• I suggest you read WP:CIVIL instead of going around and calling other people "ignoramus" and "numbskull". After you're done with that, try WP:N, WP:V, and WP:RS, which are the basic standards for what kinds of topics deserve to have a Wikipedia article. cab 01:16, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

• Author assents to deletion, article tagged with {{db-author}}. --Dhartung | Talk 02:33, 20 July 2007 (UTC)
• Delete Books fails the criteria set in WP:BK Corpx 02:37, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

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.