Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Elements of Moral Philosophy

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. ✗plicit 23:43, 22 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The Elements of Moral Philosophy[edit]

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

No evidence of notability, fails WP:GNG. No inline sources and a quick online search found no significant coverage. Mattdaviesfsic (talk) 15:33, 15 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Philosophy-related deletion discussions. Mattdaviesfsic (talk) 15:33, 15 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - per WP:TEXTBOOKS. This book is the most popular philosophy textbook according to open syllabus, it clearly meets the requirement of "whether it is, or has been, taught, or required reading, in one or more reputable educational institutions" - car chasm (talk) 16:03, 15 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - (edit conflict) I have found the following sources which are sufficient for GNG: [1], [2], [3]. I would also note that this review of another of Rachels's book begins with: James Rachels's The Elements of Moral Philosophy is one of the most popular philosophy textbooks ever written. At one point nearly a third of all ethics classes in the United States were using this book. WJ94 (talk) 16:08, 15 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Reviews in Teaching Philosophy (1993)[4], (2000)[5]; review in Personnel Review (1993)[6]; obituary of author noting its bestseller status[7], a "popular textbook" that "contains one of the best-known critiques of moral relativism"[8], a "widely used textbook"[9], a "famous textbook" [10]. Jahaza (talk) 16:28, 15 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per discussion. Clearly fulfills WP:TEXTBOOKS and reliable sources exist. ULPS (talk) 18:05, 15 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per above. Andre🚐 01:33, 18 May 2023 (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.