- 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The result was Withdrawn by nominator. ( non-admin closure) —Мандичка YO 😜 19:18, 6 November 2015 (UTC)
London Burning Book
- London Burning Book ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Subject of the article fails
WP:GNG and
WP:NBOOK. I can't find any evidence of notability.
Wikic¤l¤gy
t@lk to M£ 09:54, 29 October 2015 (UTC). Keep Nomination withdrawn.
Wikic¤l¤gy
t@lk to M£ 18:07, 6 November 2015 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. Wikic¤l¤gy t@lk to M£ 09:55, 29 October 2015 (UTC)
Move to London Burning: Portraits from a Creative City- which appears to be the actual name of the book. A search of that title turns up a large number of results, many in reliable sources, which suggests the topic is notable. Question is whether this mistitled, and inadequately described, page should be moved, or whether to just WP:BLOWITUP. I think it probably makes the most sense to move it right now. FuriouslySerene ( talk) 13:42, 29 October 2015 (UTC)
- Keep - page has already been moved now, so changing vote. There's a lot of coverage of the book in reliable sources. FuriouslySerene ( talk) 15:31, 6 November 2015 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. Human3015 TALK 14:37, 29 October 2015 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America 1000 07:24, 6 November 2015 (UTC)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America 1000 07:24, 6 November 2015 (UTC)
- Keep - moved to correct title. Has a big feature in Vogue and usual coverage. —Мандичка YO 😜 10:10, 6 November 2015 (UTC)
- Comment – Additional source searches below. North America 1000 14:21, 6 November 2015 (UTC)
- 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.
- 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 Withdrawn by nominator. ( non-admin closure) —Мандичка YO 😜 19:18, 6 November 2015 (UTC)
London Burning Book
- London Burning Book ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Subject of the article fails
WP:GNG and
WP:NBOOK. I can't find any evidence of notability.
Wikic¤l¤gy
t@lk to M£ 09:54, 29 October 2015 (UTC). Keep Nomination withdrawn.
Wikic¤l¤gy
t@lk to M£ 18:07, 6 November 2015 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. Wikic¤l¤gy t@lk to M£ 09:55, 29 October 2015 (UTC)
Move to London Burning: Portraits from a Creative City- which appears to be the actual name of the book. A search of that title turns up a large number of results, many in reliable sources, which suggests the topic is notable. Question is whether this mistitled, and inadequately described, page should be moved, or whether to just WP:BLOWITUP. I think it probably makes the most sense to move it right now. FuriouslySerene ( talk) 13:42, 29 October 2015 (UTC)
- Keep - page has already been moved now, so changing vote. There's a lot of coverage of the book in reliable sources. FuriouslySerene ( talk) 15:31, 6 November 2015 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. Human3015 TALK 14:37, 29 October 2015 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America 1000 07:24, 6 November 2015 (UTC)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America 1000 07:24, 6 November 2015 (UTC)
- Keep - moved to correct title. Has a big feature in Vogue and usual coverage. —Мандичка YO 😜 10:10, 6 November 2015 (UTC)
- Comment – Additional source searches below. North America 1000 14:21, 6 November 2015 (UTC)
- 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.