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 Speedy keep. (non-admin closure)  Ivecos (t) 17:42, 3 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

My Journey into the Heart of Terror: Ten Days in the Islamic State[edit]

My Journey into the Heart of Terror: Ten Days in the Islamic State (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

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

The article says nothing about the book, rather it is about the author. I have moved relevant information to the authors page (which is quite a small page by any standard) and this should now be deleted. Elektricity (talk) 03:58, 2 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. Happy New Year!!! ^{Babymissfortune} 04:05, 2 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Germany-related deletion discussions. Happy New Year!!! ^{Babymissfortune} 04:06, 2 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. Happy New Year!!! ^{Babymissfortune} 04:06, 2 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Speedy close and redirect. Content has, by the nominator's statement, been merged to another article, and therefore this page must remain to provide attribution. - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 04:55, 2 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep, no argument for deletion has been given. Also, needs to be kept (at least as redirect) for attribution purposes. —Kusma (t·c) 11:45, 2 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep: The article about the book describes how Todenhöfer came to write the book, and lists the chapters of the book and provides an image of the cover. The article was the topic of a Did You Know. If anything, a bit of description of what is in each chapter could be added. Having articles about authors and separate articles about books written by those authors is not rare. The nominator for deletion moved content from this article to the one about the author without attributing source. David notMD (talk) 15:36, 2 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep what are the standards of the page size?. Stub doesn't mean lack of notability and the book equally received coverage as much as its author. The Arabic and Farsi version of the article have more resources for this. And no convincing reason for deletion from the nom.–Ammarpad (talk) 15:47, 2 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. This is actually not as straightforward as some of the previous !votes. The book does not pass NBOOK on English sourcing (Guardian ran it as a serial - so not independent, and there are interviews with the author (which would not confer notability)). The Persian sources are possibly a pass, however assessing them quality and independence wise is perhaps questionable. However it does pass on German sources - e.g. [1] [2] and several others - so more than two non-trivial published works per NBOOK(1).Icewhiz (talk) 15:56, 2 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. Passes GNG! At least there are enough persian and German sources for on the book itself. --Mhhossein ^talk 18:59, 2 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep Passes WP:NBOOK, which is a pretty low bar to be sure. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 19:26, 2 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep as creator of the article. There is some reviews of the book. In other hand reliable sources which cited in the article support the notability of book and this article was nominated for wp:DYK. It contained acceptable size and I tried explain how and why this book was authored. It is clear that wikipedians can add lots of context about book in the article, but it doesn't look to be permitted (based wp:ATD) the deletion of article.Saff V. (talk) 10:36, 3 January 2018 (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.