Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jungles Long Ago

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 redirect to Kenneth Anderson (writer). slakr^\ talk / 12:16, 11 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Jungles Long Ago

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

Non-notable book, nothing but a resume of contents. TheLongTone (talk) 23:12, 30 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. The author is a very notable writer in India, and internationally in the fields of conservation and hunting. In this regard, as he only wrote eight books (this being the final one) I would deem it a notable book. The page provides general publication history, detailed summary of each short story, relevant quotes, book jacket image and link to an online version of the text. None such information was previously listed on the Author's specific page. You talking2me (talk) 01:09, 31 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

In which case it would be better to add the revevant information aboutall this author's books to his biog.TheLongTone (talk) 10:26, 31 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Kenneth Anderson (writer). The author is undeniably notable, but notability must still be established for each of his individual works as notability is WP:NOTINHERITED automatically by him having wrote it. I can find where this book is mentioned in passing in relation to the author, but I can't find any in-depth scrutiny of this book in specific. The closest I found was this work, but we'd need more than just one source to show notability. If someone can find them then I'm willing to be persuaded, but by large the sources out there as a whole talk about Anderson himself and his writing career as a whole rather than this book specifically. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 04:35, 31 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. Thank you for your well argued feedback. On that basis i'll concede that perhaps an individual page is not needed for the book (or his preceding books). I will take the suggestion of TheLongTone and incorporate the individual book information on the author's page, perhaps with a separate heading for each of his books to keep it tidy. I'll try and neaten up the rest of the author's page as well as it is a bit messy. Thanks You talking2me (talk) 19:54, 31 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

No problem- you might still want to continue digging for sources for him, as it's entirely possible that there is a plethora of sources for him that aren't on the Internet. I know that in the past we've had that happen- especially with sources located in places such as India, where the print sources were never placed on the Internet but would be considered a RS. As such it'd probably be a good idea to leave the article's history intact in case you or someone else does find this sourcing. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 13:56, 4 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:06, 31 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:06, 31 January 2014 (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.