Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Man in Black: His Own Story in His Own Words

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. Nomination withdrawn. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 05:50, 10 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Man in Black: His Own Story in His Own Words[edit]

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

While the book has served in making a film on Cash's life, it does not seem to have any notability worth mentioning beyond this that is not already neatly summarized in Cash's page or on the movie's page. It has remained as a single sentence saying only that the book was used in the movie. Yaksar (let's chat) 14:09, 3 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Strong Keep - [1] - one of the top ten most sought after out of print books, Book was published in 1975. That is about 15-20 years before the internet. Reviews would be in hardcopy at a library in the media of the time. Taking a look at Wikipedia:Notability_(books), "A book is generally notable if it verifiably meets through reliable sources, one or more of the following criteria:", and then "The book has been considered by reliable sources to have made a significant contribution to a notable motion picture" (of which there are several references indicating this). I would even go so far as to say it meets "The book's author is so historically significant that any of his or her written works may be considered notable. ". Can the article be improved? Yes. Is this reason for deletion? No. Turlo Lomon (talk) 15:21, 3 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I agree with Turlo Lomon's reasoning. The book was made into a notable film, so its notable. Dream Focus 15:33, 3 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I disagree with Dream Focus' statement that being made in to a notable film automatically makes a work notable, but Turlo Lomon's reasoning seems sound, and I have changed my opinion on the article to keep.--Yaksar (let's chat) 17:01, 3 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

He quoted the part from WP:BOOKS which says "The book has been considered by reliable sources to have made a significant contribution to a notable motion picture, or other art form, or event or political or religious movement." It was made into a notable motion picture, and thus significantly contributed to it. Dream Focus 17:11, 3 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Weak Keep. General agreement with other "Keepers." A search on WorldCat showed only 33 libraries had copies (not a clinching argument - I'm just adding to the discussion with another piece of info). Zondervan press (the publisher) is a Bibles and Christian books publisher which is probably why there aren't more copies in libraries. I'm a pinko liberal progressive who recognizes existing biases by library purchasers against certain publishers and Zondervan is one of those publishers. Given the subject, the relationship to the movie, the cite from the Washington Post about being in the "Top 10 Most Sought After Out-of-Print Books in 2006" I lean to keeping this. Needs improvement. --Quartermaster (talk) 17:26, 3 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Question - since the nominator changed to keep, does this count as nomination withdrawn, and thus, speedy close? Turlo Lomon (talk) 17:59, 3 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 19:58, 4 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy Keep and Close per withdrawn nomination and the lack of deletion requests. SanchiTachi (talk) 21:16, 4 February 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.