Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pardon, madame: pismo iz Čedada

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. As the article currently is, delete. No prejudice against rewriting an expanded version or merging into the author article. Tone 08:28, 5 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Pardon, madame: pismo iz Čedada[edit]

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

It's a book. The author doesn't have an article, even at the other wiki. Not a single source. Fails WP:GNG. Bbb23 (talk) 13:59, 27 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. The Mighty Glen (talk) 14:35, 27 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Slovenia-related deletion discussions. The Mighty Glen (talk) 14:35, 27 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Pardon me, nominator, but Boris Jukic (b 1947) does have an article on the Slovenian Wikipedia which lists this book as one of his. The article is https://sl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boris_Jukić and it has been there since 2010. Jukic has significant coverage in GBooks and elsewhere (assuming I understand the Slovenian language sources correctly) and also many hundreds of library holdings according to worldcat [1] and presumably even more in non-members. He appears notable. Move the page to Boris Jukić and rewrite it as a biography. James500 (talk) 19:23, 27 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You're absolutely right, James500. I did look but was too hasty in my reading.--Bbb23 (talk) 21:13, 27 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - James500 has argued that author Boris Jukic is notable, but that means little for this book in its own right. Someone could create a Boris Jukic article here and if that survives on its own merits, then individual books could qualify for their own articles if they pass the notability guidelines. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (Talk|Contribs) 15:32, 3 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Szzuk (talk) 09:21, 4 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nomination, and even more so, the input by Doomsdayer520. -The Gnome (talk) 13:17, 4 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as Doomsdayer520 noted - to the tune that even in the Slovenian Wikipedia where the author has a page (and thus presumably there is more consideration on him and his works), the book does not have one. It should not have a page here, either, though an author page would certainly appear to be notable, if created. Nosebagbear (talk) 14:58, 4 April 2018 (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.