Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Story Bible

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. So Why 13:43, 18 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The Story Bible[edit]

Non notable picture book with no external links/citations for WP:V Flewis^(talk) 05:41, 13 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'd say weak keep based on the author alone. Pearl S. Buck was a pretty important writer. Unfortunately, I haven't found much information about the book beyond brief mentions in a few sources, but I'd be surprised if it wasn't reviewed somewhere when it was released. Even if no sources materialize, we might as well convert this into a redirect to the author's page, so deletion isn't necessary. Zagalejo^^^ 05:56, 13 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Pearl S. Buck - per Zagalejo. If however enough WP:RS were found, and a little more information on the book was introduced, I may change my opinion to keep --Flewis^(talk) 06:02, 13 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect I think the main article could fit this in and benefit from the information contained in this article... ChildofMidnight (talk) 06:31, 13 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Bible (writing): the title Story Bible redirects to Bible (writing), and it would be reasonable to treat this as if there were no "The". Nyttend (talk) 01:35, 14 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think that's the best solution. If someone types in "The Story Bible", with that exact wording and capitalization, I think it's more likely they're looking for a specific book. Maybe a disambiguation page is in order. Zagalejo^^^ 21:19, 14 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. -- Raven1977 (talk) 05:51, 16 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Christianity-related deletion discussions. -- Raven1977 (talk) 05:52, 16 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per this Google News search. It's clear that it's a notable book, so I see no reason to redirect it to the author, although that would not be an inappropriate outcome. Let us not mistake "little in the article" for "little that can go in the article" Jclemens (talk) 06:21, 16 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep but it is only a stub. A book of 528 pages is hardly trivial. The article does not say that it is picture book, and (since Buck was a novelist), my guess is that it is not one. It is described as a paraphrase in one article found by Jclemens. I have therefore removed "allegorical novel" from the infobox as wrong. Peterkingiron (talk) 17:18, 16 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.