Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Byzantium; v. 1: The Early Centuries
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- 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. postdlf (talk) 02:23, 26 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Byzantium; v. 1: The Early Centuries[edit]
- Byzantium; v. 1: The Early Centuries (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Fails WP:N with no significant secondary source coverage asserted either in article or just generally locatable. Jay Σεβαστόςdiscuss 20:18, 19 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep, expand and rename to Byzantium: The Early Centuries. This review and this bestseller list in the New York Times establish notability. The current article needs improvement, though. Pburka (talk) 21:25, 19 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 01:55, 20 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of History-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 01:55, 20 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep. I've rewritten the article, added categories and references. Quite a bit more can be done, but it's an okay stub now, and does have notablity. The page needs to be moved - I'll leave that to someone else. Truthkeeper88 (talk) 02:50, 20 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep. Despite its flaws, Norwich's series on Byzantium is one of the most popular and accessible introductory works on the empire's history (witness the dozens if not hundreds of Wikipedia articles using it as a reference). A move is in order per Pburka, however it should probably wait the outcome of this AfD. Constantine ✍ 20:39, 20 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep but I am going to move it. Actually, almost all of JJN's works are probably notable as he is such a noted author, especially on this historical period, though it is probably difficult to find references to individual works. Deb (talk) 12:49, 25 March 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.