Talk:Spiritual book club

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] Problems

I added the "notability" tag to this article last month, coincidentally within minutes of someone else adding an "unencyclopedic" tag. The latter tag was just removed on the grounds that it had not been discussed.

Lack of discussion is not really a good reason for removing such tags. In any case, maybe I can help explain some of the issues with "Spiritual Book Club".

The article is largely definitional, mostly involving what an SBC is. This is contrary to Wikipedia policy. It desperately need a good discussion of the value of such clubs, as well as any available contrary opinions. It also needs better references to demonstrate "notability". References showing the existence of one or more clubs are not particularly useful in this way, but rather references discussing these clubs in general, their history, how they are organized, and similar factual information about them are needed. In other words, if people are talking about the concept of spiritual book clubs, then such discussions help show notability. If they are merely talking about the existence of such groups, then such a reference is not nearly as useful. Tim Ross·^talk 11:56, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

Some sources would help and wikifying the rest and I agree the notability tag seems most appropriate. If those issues are addressed would be an excellent start. I think notability is a priority here. Benjiboi 22:31, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

As the problems have not been addressed, I've just redirected the article to Book discussion club. The need for a separate article has not been established and it's pretty obvious that a "spiritual book club" is a book club with a spiritual slant, which is the only thing the present article was saying. Pichpich (talk) 18:48, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

I mostly concur although it might have been more diplomatic to gain a consensus before effective removing the article. Did you attempt to merge usable material to the target article? I still think there is more to the subject and we simply haven't found it yet but as the main article develops perhaps that will be more evident. Banjiboi 19:40, 29 March 2008 (UTC)