Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sound of the Beast: The Complete Headbanging History of Heavy Metal
- 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) Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:23, 10 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Sound of the Beast: The Complete Headbanging History of Heavy Metal (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)
Fails WP:NB. No substantial coverage, and the author's notability is as a radio host much more so than as an author. MSJapan (talk) 03:10, 31 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep, plenty of significant coverage exists. The book was reveiewed by reliable sources such as The Kansas City Star (link), Library Journal (link), the Washington City Paper (link), the Phoenix New Times (link), and more; and it's cited and referenced in a couple dozen books and a couple dozen scholarly publications. Also Google News Archive hits seem to suggest that Ian Christe is far more notable as an author than as a radio host. DHowell (talk) 03:20, 3 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, MBisanz talk 10:44, 5 April 2009 (UTC)[reply] - Keep, per DHowell's pretty extensive argument. Seegoon (talk) 11:20, 5 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Although the article could certainly do with some edits to include that pertinent information. I'll see if I can squeeze some of it in. Seegoon (talk) 11:21, 5 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- I've spruced it up considerably. Maybe this'll be sufficient to salvage it. Seegoon (talk) 11:51, 5 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Although the article could certainly do with some edits to include that pertinent information. I'll see if I can squeeze some of it in. Seegoon (talk) 11:21, 5 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. -- I'mperator 12:57, 5 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep. Adequate independent coverage to justify an article.--Michig (talk) 17:40, 5 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep Meets WP:BK standards. Pastor Theo (talk) 23:04, 5 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep Does give notability and independent coverage. Captain Gamma (talk) 23:09, 6 April 2009 (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.