Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Antique Collector's Guide
=[[The Antique Collector's Guide]]=
- {{Special:Prefixindex/Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Antique Collector's Guide}}
:{{la|The Antique Collector's Guide}} – (
:({{findsources|The Antique Collector's Guide}})
not notable at all, not even an article Alan - talk 21:10, 17 March 2010 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 00:45, 18 March 2010 (UTC)
::Well, it is an article. It's called a stub:) But not much scope for expansion, and I don't think it meets WP:NB. I would suggest a redirect to the author David Benedictus.--Pawnkingthree (talk) 11:41, 18 March 2010 (UTC)
- Comment. I'm the editor who objected to the prod a while back, based on being able to find information about several reviews of the book. That said, it is obviously a minor work, so a redirect the article about the author seems fine to me. --RL0919 (talk) 00:38, 19 March 2010 (UTC)
:Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, —SpacemanSpiff 01:02, 25 March 2010 (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.