The book you added links to is not "an alternative viewpoint", it is just another book about the Key of Solomon. As it stands the addition of links to that book do not add anything encyclopedic, the book itself is not notable and does not provide any more information about the subjects of the pages you added the link to. Qutezuce 08:31, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
It was debated on that very point and the result of the debate was to keep. The future novel by someone who's previous book spent a long time on various best sellers lists is very notable. As for it not being published, quoting from official Wikipedia policy: "All articles about anticipated events must be verifiable, and the subject matter must be of sufficiently wide interest that it would merit an article if the event had already occurred." I think it is obvious that Dan Brown's next book falls into that category. But some random book being republished in blog form isn't notable as far as I can tell. If you can provide some proof that this book is notable I would be interested, but so far you have not. Qutezuce 02:16, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
Welcome!
Hello, Wikicleric, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:
I hope you enjoy editing here and being a
Wikipedian! Please
sign your messages on
discussion pages using four
tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out
Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on
my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}}
before the question. Again, welcome!
PDCook (
talk)
15:38, 30 December 2009 (UTC)
Please do not add promotional material to Wikipedia. While
objective prose about products or services is acceptable, Wikipedia is not intended to be
a vehicle for advertising or promotion. Thank you.
Ckatz
chat
spy
05:03, 28 May 2010 (UTC)
I have nominated Resurrection Planet, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Resurrection Planet. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.
Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. St Anselm ( talk) 05:42, 28 May 2010 (UTC)
Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to
talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should
sign your posts by typing four
tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You may also click on the signature button
located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you. --
SineBot (
talk)
04:02, 30 May 2010 (UTC)
The book you added links to is not "an alternative viewpoint", it is just another book about the Key of Solomon. As it stands the addition of links to that book do not add anything encyclopedic, the book itself is not notable and does not provide any more information about the subjects of the pages you added the link to. Qutezuce 08:31, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
It was debated on that very point and the result of the debate was to keep. The future novel by someone who's previous book spent a long time on various best sellers lists is very notable. As for it not being published, quoting from official Wikipedia policy: "All articles about anticipated events must be verifiable, and the subject matter must be of sufficiently wide interest that it would merit an article if the event had already occurred." I think it is obvious that Dan Brown's next book falls into that category. But some random book being republished in blog form isn't notable as far as I can tell. If you can provide some proof that this book is notable I would be interested, but so far you have not. Qutezuce 02:16, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
Welcome!
Hello, Wikicleric, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:
I hope you enjoy editing here and being a
Wikipedian! Please
sign your messages on
discussion pages using four
tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out
Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on
my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}}
before the question. Again, welcome!
PDCook (
talk)
15:38, 30 December 2009 (UTC)
Please do not add promotional material to Wikipedia. While
objective prose about products or services is acceptable, Wikipedia is not intended to be
a vehicle for advertising or promotion. Thank you.
Ckatz
chat
spy
05:03, 28 May 2010 (UTC)
I have nominated Resurrection Planet, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Resurrection Planet. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.
Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. St Anselm ( talk) 05:42, 28 May 2010 (UTC)
Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to
talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should
sign your posts by typing four
tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You may also click on the signature button
located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you. --
SineBot (
talk)
04:02, 30 May 2010 (UTC)