Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Knots in My Yo-Yo String

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. Arguments for keeping haven't been the strongest but there's clearly no consensus for any other result. – Juliancolton | ^Talk 21:43, 6 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Knots in My Yo-Yo String[edit]

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

Off-topic content Delsquare31 (talk) 21:51, 8 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy Keep not a valid reason for deletion. it needs sources, but those can be added. ThePlatypusofDoom (talk) 23:26, 8 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
(after edit conflict) Delete. Off-topic content is a reason to remove the off-topic content, as I have just done. The nominator hasn't given any policy-compliant reason for deletion, so I will. The article subject does not meet the standards of the general notability guideline or the specific guideline for books. 86.17.222.157 (talk) 23:30, 8 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. It is astonishing that this article has existed for over six years in such a state: no references at all, most of its content not about the ostensible topic of the article, and no evidence of notability. As the editor at IP address 86.17.222.157 rightly points out, the reason given by the nominator is not a reason for deletion, but the lack of evidence of notability (either in the article or anywhere else that I can find) is. As for ThePlatypusofDoom's comment, merely stating that sources "can be added" without saying what or where those sources are is of no value: see WP:MUSTBESOURCES. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 20:52, 10 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 11:09, 12 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, "It is astonishing that this article has existed for over six years in such a state", not really as its talkpage doesn't have any wikiprojects on it, btw it is notable, has been reviewed by Publisher's Weekly, Booklist, School Library Journal, Horn Book Magazine, Book Links, here is the EBSCO list of the reviews and its held in over 1200 libraries, pretty good for a kids book that was written nearly twenty years ago. Coolabahapple (talk) 17:01, 19 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - notable, charming and has a lot of potential. We are here to build an encyclopedia, not tear it down. It is now:
- referenced with good sources
- I can't get the infobox coding to work with the deletion template on the top of the page.
- Lots of content yet to add from the sources. Barbara (WVS) (talk) 18:45, 19 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Keep The sources and references added have helped to establish notability. Pauciloquence (talk) 05:55, 21 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Jerry Spinelli. Aspect of his biography. Can be spun out once there is more content. Sandstein 07:04, 21 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: looks like an overhaul happened in the meantime slakr^\ talk / 02:50, 22 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, slakr^\ talk / 02:50, 22 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, – Juliancolton | ^Talk 00:41, 30 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Keep No rationale for deletion. 2600:100F:B020:6870:5408:1605:FE77:B8E7 (talk) 05:40, 30 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. References are provided.700yuster (talk) 12:44, 30 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - topic is clearly notable, with more than enough reliable sources. It looks a really good, sensitive and intelligent book about childhood, by the way. Chiswick Chap (talk) 13:59, 30 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as it passes WP:NB. —MRD2014 (talk • contribs) 02:15, 6 January 2017 (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.