Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Baalbek, Monument Phenicien

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 merge to Lina_Murr_Nehme. v/r - T P 03:24, 25 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Baalbek, Monument Phenicien

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

Previous PROD was removed. No notability established or claimed. Deadly∀ssassin 21:37, 17 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lebanon-related deletion discussions. — — alf.laylah.wa.laylah (talk) 21:46, 17 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. — • Gene93k (talk) 02:12, 18 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

merge into an article on the author. As I said on my talk p. (I was asked about this a few hours ago, since she is writing articles for many of her books): As a practical matter, she is perhaps notable as an author, since two of her books are in many but not all of the major French university libraries, so an article on her and a merge seems reasonable. There's even an English language source about her, [1]. Worldcat & the French university Union Catalog, sudoc, [2] give only 5 holdings-- the superlative German-based international union catalog, Karlsruhe Virtual Catalog KVK , [3] adds only one or two. I think however a thorough search would probably find reviews of the book--I think a thorough search would find reviews of essentially all academic books from major publishers, and if we took BOOKS literally every notable author would have some or all of their books separately notable, as would many non-notable authors. (To summarize my view of that guideline: books, as well as sports and popular entertainment, are among the things over-covered by the press, especially the coverage of academic books by academic journals, and so the GNG for these subjects is way too broad. To the extent Wikipedia:Notability (books) incorporates it as criterion 1, it is way too broad.) I am therefore not going to do such a search for this article, as I do not think the book or her other books appropriate for a Wikipedia article. I can't search for every Wikipedia article , so I work if I can on those things most likely to be notable in some real sense. DGG ( talk ) 02:59, 18 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Little better than spam. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 21:18, 18 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. This is part of a series of articles being introduced by the same editor all promoting what appear to be non-notable books per WP:NBOOK and WP:GNG. ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 15:40, 19 September 2011 (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.