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 delete. –Juliancolton ^Tropical ^Cyclone 00:36, 25 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

A Guide to the Good Life: The Ancient Art of Stoic Joy[edit]

Book spam. No evidence of notability is cited (just one brief review). The author who created the article is busy spamming it across dozens of other articles. Dicklyon (talk) 07:28, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete I see no notability, it seems more like a promotion of this book then an encyclopedia article --Pstanton 07:41, 20 January 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pstanton (talk • contribs)
Delete - not a very notable book. Wandering Courier (talk) 08:49, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Asserts no notablility. Note It has also been spammed to other language Wikipedias--DFS454 (talk) 12:13, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
By "spamming", I was trying to comply with the order to connect my article with links. Now I am spamming. I have nothing to gain from promoting this book. I realize now that the book should have several years of publication to age like a fine wine. When it does, and several reviews come in, I shall put it back up. Yet it seems that opinion is against me, so I shall delete it. Good day. Kerry Douglas 12:24, 20 January 2009 (UTC)
Keep. A review in the Library Journal indicates notability, and I don't find the tone of this article to be too far out of NPOV standards.--ragesoss (talk) 01:47, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

What does that mean? Isn't notability established by citing independent reliable sources about it? If you found some, cite them. Dicklyon (talk) 02:19, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. If, in a year, there are a dozen good reviews in notable journals, then will you relent? Will your for five reviews? Three? How many reviews does it take for you to relent? Does it have to age a while? It was a close call for me to write it, but I thought the article was a good contribution to the various Stoic schools. I did not have any "unlawful" capitalist gain from writing it. I do not work for the author or the publishers. I am a public librarian who saw a work that contributed something to popular understanding of Stoicism. It is perhaps my naive understanding that a recent book raise some hackles. Perhaps at three good reviews we can talk about keeping the article? Otherwise, just drop it?Kerry Douglas 04:29, 24 January 2009 (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.