Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/With Every Mistake

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. (non-admin closure) WJ94 (talk) 13:41, 13 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

With Every Mistake

[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)

Tagged for notability since 2010. One single review. Fails WP:GNG. UtherSRG (talk) 11:45, 6 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Literature, Politics, Social science, and Canada. UtherSRG (talk) 11:45, 6 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Simply no evidence of notability for this published collection of articles - no media outside press release/book blogs and no critical review of any weight that I could find. When EVERY mention of the book starts with "This essential collection contains..." you can sense the fell hand of the publisher's publicist. The George Harrison quote, "With every mistake, we must surely be learning." is nice, though. Best Alexandermcnabb (talk) 14:26, 6 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per the significant coverage in multiple independent reliable sources. Wikipedia:Notability (books)#Criteria says: Sources
1. Whitlock, Nathan. "With Every Mistake". Quill & Quire. Archived from the original on 2023-07-08. Retrieved 2023-07-08.
  The review notes: "A collection of columns by Gwynne Dyer is a different beast. Dyer, one of the most respected and well-known writers on geopolitics and global conflict in the world, has been doing this for more than 30 years, averaging around 100 syndicated columns in each of those years, and yet he has never before put together a collection. In fact, as he admits in the introduction to With Every Mistake, he “generally cannot remember the topic, let alone the title, of the article I wrote twenty-four hours ago.”"
2. Good, Alex (2005-12-24). "Getting himself out of Dyer straits". Waterloo Region Record. Archived from the original on 2023-07-08. Retrieved 2023-07-08.
  The review notes: "Columns on international affairs from South America to Africa to Asia to outer space are included, but it's clear from the outset that Dyer's main focus is on Iraq (a subject he has already covered in two other books: Ignorant Armies and Future: Tense)."
3. Davidson, Dan (2007-04-27). "With every mistake we must surely be learning something". Whitehorse Daily Star. Retrieved 2023-07-08 – via Newspapers.com.
  The review notes: "Every Mistake is not just a collection of columns; it is also a compendium of after-thoughts, with Dyer commenting on his own successes and failures as a columnist. ... The columns are short items, mostly under 2,000 words. Park the book in your bathroom and you may find yourself seeking relief more often."
4. Mertl, Steve (2005-12-10). "Book reviews". The Hamilton Spectator. Archived from the original on 2023-07-08. Retrieved 2023-07-08.
  The review notes: "Dyer's sardonic style is entertaining. There's a jaded, world-weary quality to it, but he creates optimism. As scary as they are, terrorist attacks are relative pinpricks on the continuum of violence compared with the large-scale wars of a few decades ago."
There is sufficient coverage in reliable sources to allow With Every Mistake to pass Wikipedia:Notability#General notability guideline, which requires "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject".
Cunard (talk) 05:08, 8 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per the 4 lengthy book reviews Cunard cited. Gwynne Dyer is an important Canadian writer.

--A. B. ^{(talk • contribs • global count)} 21:23, 9 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per WP:BOOKCRIT.1 after reviewing Cunard's sources. —siro χ o 01:19, 11 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per sources provided by Cunard. - Indefensible (talk) 05:43, 11 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep based upon the book reviews and WP:BOOKCRIT.1. I was the initial author for this article, and I only found 1 of the reviews that Cunard referenced. Andrew Sullivan Cant (talk) 18:51, 12 July 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.