Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Burroughs Report

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 delete. --Akhilleus (talk) 17:07, 28 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The Burroughs Report

This article is about an e-book by William S. Burroughs. First, it fails WP:BK since no secondary sources are known. Second, I would merge to the article about the author if there were any sources about this text; but even the text itself is no longer available online, the web site seems to be dead. PROD was contested, with comment: "major author. any of his works is impt." By WP:BK, this would require special historical significance of the author, which does not seem obvious to me. --B. Wolterding 15:09, 20 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

- Comment I'm not sure what constitutes special historical significance for an author. The WP:BK page says that an author who is the "subject of common classroom study" would have special historical significance, but it does not specify how this is determined[1]. In my experience, William S. Burroughs is a "subject of common classroom study." Jordansc 16:06, 20 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Weak Delete William S. Burroughs is an important author but, as far as I can tell, The Burroughs Report is not cited in the MLA bibliography and doesn't come up in Academic Search Premier. Unless other sources are forthcoming, this information should be included in the William S. Burroughs article. Jordansc 16:44, 20 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

comment I contested the prod, in the hope of bringing it to attention to see if secondary sources could be found. I agree that otherwise it would be best merged.DGG 01:22, 21 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature-related deletions. -- John Vandenberg 09:22, 21 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Question: If the article is to be merged, as you suggest, what content should be merged to William S. Burroughs? There are no sources whatsoever, not even primary ones, not even sources confirming the existence of the text. I can hardly merge a sentence like, "Allegedly there has been a web site, on which an autobiography..." --B. Wolterding 18:39, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, not notable book. Am I the only on who see a parked domain on the external link? It's possible the owner just lost the domain, there's a recent whois change. The book still turns up on google. -- Steve Hart 15:16, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Well, at least the link to the book still turns up on Google. But I don't think that the Google cache is a reliable source that can be cited... --B. Wolterding 15:21, 25 June 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.