Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Das außergewöhnliche Buch

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 merge to Berlin International Literature Festival. Please merge anything of value and redirect ASAP as WP:Alternatives to deletion. Thanks everyone! Missvain (talk) 22:41, 3 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Das außergewöhnliche Buch

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

Fails WP:GNG, advertising. Recreation under a different name (See: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Extraordinary Book) The Banner talk 20:12, 4 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Awards-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 20:56, 4 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 20:56, 4 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Germany-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 20:56, 4 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Berlin International Literature Festival. Not much has changed since the last AfD. None of the sources in the article have the depth or independence to count towards WP:GNG. The German Wikipedia article is entirely unsourced, so nobody at our sister project seems to have found any reliable sources either. My own search turned up lots of sponsored posts akin to those already in the article. I agree with the nominator that the article might constitute advertising by a WP:SPA. Modussiccandi (talk) 21:47, 4 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Hang on. The fact that de.wiki has an unsourced article doesn't mean it's unsourceable. What it means is that de.wiki has different inclusion standards to en.wiki. (Specifically, en.wiki trusts sources, but de.wiki trusts editors, which is why pending changes works really well for de.wiki and really poorly for here. A lot of perfectly good de.wiki articles are unsourced.) The Berliner Abendblatt source here is editorially independent and I see no reason why it wouldn't be reliable. The Buchmark source here isn't really about the award so much as about the literary festival, although the award is mentioned. I've looked for more sources and the problem I'm experiencing is that the search term brings up a lot of false positives for me. We probably wouldn't do too badly to ask at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Germany for input from some Germans.—S Marshall T/C 12:53, 5 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@S Marshall: My rationale for redirecting wasn't based solely on the fact that de.wiki doesn't have sources on this topic - although I must say that I was unaware of this difference in policy. The problem seems to be the general lack of in-depth coverage. The Abendblatt article you pointed out is certainly reliable but I don't think it amounts to significant coverage. I don't see why we would need specialist input: I'm a native speaker of German and, judging from your userpage, you seem to know German well, too. What's to stop us from searching through lots of pages of search results on the term? Having done this, I've concluded that the award is not by itself notable and should be redirected. That's not to say, though, that I wouldn't reconsider my !vote if significant coverage were to surface.Modussiccandi (talk) 14:35, 5 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think German speakers are "specialist input"; just that they're more likely to have informed opinions on this topic.—S Marshall T/C 16:09, 5 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 19:36, 12 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 17:23, 19 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Our practical rough guide for prizes is that mosto f the reciipiants are notable .. That seems ti be the case here. DGG ( talk ) 03:06, 22 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Missvain (talk) 00:04, 27 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Merge with Berlin International Literature Festival, since they're the ones who present it. A single section would do. The award itself doesn't seem to be very notable, and looking at the books that received the award they don't seem to be advertising the fact that they won that particular award. Uses x (talk • contribs) 23:45, 28 May 2021 (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.