Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Kingdom of Speech

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 speedy keep. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 06:30, 17 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The Kingdom of Speech[edit]

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

References currently in article consist of one primary reference and two blog entries. The latter lack reliability and the first is problematic as a WP:PRIMARY source. The paucity of discussion in reliable independent secondary sources suggests that this book is not notable, though I want to give credit to the article's author, Geoffrey1912, for his apparent first effort at article creation— please don't let this deletion nomination blow out your candle, and please feel free to leave me a message on my personal talk page to discuss things further, yes? KDS4444 (talk) 12:36, 10 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 10:03, 13 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 10:03, 13 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, meets WP:NBOOK and WP:GNG, reviewed by Kirkus Reviews - "Typically, Wolfe throws a Molotov cocktail at conventional wisdom in a book that won’t settle any argument but is sure to start some."[1], Publishers Weekly - "Wolfe is at his best when portraying the lives of the scientists and their respective eras, and his vibrant study manages to be clever, funny, serious, satirical, and instructive."[2], Library Journal(a short one) - "Here, he works his way from Alfred Russel Wallace, who thought up the theory of natural selection before Darwin but then renounced it, to contemporary anthropologist Daniel Everett’s upset-the-apple-cart claim that language is not hardwired, to make the eye-popping assertion that human achievement and complex social structure are owing not to evolution but to speech."[3], and by The Times[4], and Booklist and a longer review in Publishers Weekly[5], National Public Review also discusses the books development - "Wolfe has hinted at the idea before, notably in a 2006 lecture called "The Human Beast."[6] Coolabahapple (talk) 10:59, 13 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Plainly a notable book, so the only other possibility would be to merge this into the author's article. But a few days after creation there is no need to be hasty. Imaginatorium (talk) 11:09, 13 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. A widely reviewed book. Xxanthippe (talk) 22:33, 13 August 2016 (UTC).[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Language-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 20:34, 14 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 06:37, 15 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I withdraw my nomination - Article now has adequate sourcing, and I now concur that the book is in fact a notable work. KDS4444 (talk) 01:48, 17 August 2016 (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.