Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/I'm A Teacher, Get Me Out of Here

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) Ron Ritzman (talk) 15:13, 21 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm A Teacher, Get Me Out of Here[edit]

Non-notable, no reliable sources - hoax? D.M.N. (talk) 16:14, 16 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. If you bothered to check Google, you'd know it wasn't a hoax and that at least one reliable source exists. Since that makes one point moot and a second resolvable, you've left no solid explanation as to why this isn't notable. However, I would apply the same rules as with albums here, not have a book if we don't have an article on the writer. Please do the research next time. - Mgm|^(talk) 16:31, 16 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - the book easily passes WP:N with several substantial reviews that constitute "sources address the subject directly in detail"- see [1], [2], [3], [4], [5] and so on. TerriersFan (talk) 17:49, 16 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per TerriersFan. There are a few more reviews out there: [6], [7], [8], etc. It doesn't matter that the author is a redlink. Many notable writers still do not have Wikipedia articles. Zagalejo^^^ 20:04, 16 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. -- Raven1977 (talk) 00:56, 17 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. —TerriersFan (talk) 03:07, 17 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Education-related deletion discussions. —TerriersFan (talk) 03:11, 17 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:28, 21 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Notability has been clearly demonstrated above. I don't understand why this has been relisted rather than closed as a keep - the nominator's argument has been refuted and the other delete comment has no grounding in policy or guidelines. Phil Bridger (talk) 08:35, 21 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Notability has clearly been showed, I don't even think this should be an AFD because this article passes everything that an article must have. Plus, an article for the author can always be made so the delete comment from above is irrefutable. Hairy Perry 14:35, 21 November 2008 (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.