Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Hunts

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. Nomination is withdrawn. Liz Read! Talk! 06:57, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Hunts

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

The Hunts (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:SIGCOV. It's essentially unreferenced. The only cited "source" (air quotes) is to an obscure unpublished speech. Definitely not usable as a source per WP:Verifiability. 4meter4 (talk) 03:51, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. The original Spanish title was Las cacerías according to an article in the Journal of Romance Studies, under which there appear to be many many hits. This book, entirely about the author, has 93 uses of the title. This newspaper article mentions it, looks like sigcov but idk spanish. Here as well. Lot of other hits - this was the author's only work ever translated into English. PARAKANYAA (talk) 06:20, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment. I appreciate the effort to find sources. That's great but there needs to be some actual content on the book to indicate its importance or the article should be speedy deleted per WP:A7. Our speedy delete criteria supercedes notability criteria, so any attempt to keep the article needs to at least meet this basic requirement. @ Hyperbolick and PARAKANYAA could you please take the time to make a credible claim to why the book is encyclopedic in the article by expanding the text of the article. That should only take a a few sentences (use WP:BOOKCRIT as a guide). A stub should be sufficient to establish that. Best.4meter4 (talk) 12:12, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @4meter4 I strongly disagree. Also A7 doesn't even apply to books: "it does not apply to articles about albums (these may be covered by CSD A9), products, books, films, TV programs, software, or other creative works, nor to entire species of animals."
    I will do so anyway, because I am a nice person, but come on. PARAKANYAA (talk) 12:15, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Apologies. I should have read that policy more carefully. I find it odd that commercial products are exempt from that policy. One would think that a basic assertion of encyclopedic notability would be a fundamental requirement of all articles and not just selective topical areas. Best.4meter4 (talk) 12:25, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@4meter4 I have now added stuff. There is a lot more but all the analysis is so poetic that it's very difficult for me to understand what they're talking about especially given the language barrier. PARAKANYAA (talk) 12:36, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I mean, it's not bereft of sources, either. Could merge to Amelia Biagioni. Hyperbolick (talk) 12:39, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
There's more sources in any case but this fulfills our notability guidelines. I don't see the point of the merge because it certainly wouldn't improve the author's article as reception to a singular work and not her whole body of work would come off jarring, IMO. PARAKANYAA (talk) 12:42, 30 August 2024 (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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/The_Hunts&oldid=1243223192"
Uses material from the Wikipedia article Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Hunts, released under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license.