417:
single journal article. Therefore editing a book is very different from writing a book since editing one basically involves the conceptual work of identifying a theme but letting people express their own thoughts (usually there is very little editorial input on the text itself and the main contribution is selecting the contribution and contributing author to cover a topic in breadth and depth). Still, I would argue that the contribution for an edited volume is a bit more than a journal article but nowhere near comparable to a original book. I am therefore somewhat skeptical in "bending" the NAUTHOR rules to apply to editors of books. Yes, being asked to edit a book can be a sign of distinction but not a very strong signal, especially given the large number of books being published. --
545:) put this past the finish line. In addition no one has indicated they did a search for non-English sources for reviews of their work as brought up by Espresso Addict. Looking at the article, everything seems sourced reasonably for a BLP. The noms comment regarding this being "Highly promotional" is very questionable.
416:
since that clearly doesnt seem to be the spirit of the guidelines. In most fields I am aware of, the editor of a book (and I have seen this process from the inside) selects multiple people to contribute and usually contributes a single chapter to the book themselves, which is generally as long as a
203:
259:
520:
of "Amigao", which lists many well-established grievances against the user. Therefore it's no surprise that "Amigao" initiates a deletion of a
Knowledge entry that doesn't reflect badly on China.
509:
editing
Knowledge entries with an anti-China bias at an industrial scale. Although the complaints were not made by the best reputable sources, the description is worth considering.
160:
365:
I have been unable to find additional reviews. She appears in the
Chinese media, but beyond Google translate I don't have the ability to evaluate those or find new sources.
351:- thus far I have found three books with reviews, one of them with multiple reviews in academic journals. As I suspect there are more, I will keep working on this one.
197:
271:
267:
263:
516:
by "Amigao" are enormous - the user edits tons of stuff on a daily basis! So is that a shared account, which violates
Knowledge rules? You can also look at the
328:
275:
107:
92:
255:
521:
296:
133:
128:
388:
for me but it's only weak because the number is still low and most of them are for an edited volume rather than an authored work. —
506:
137:
60:
87:
80:
17:
120:
218:
185:
310:. There are twelve books listed; what has the nominator done to check that they lack reviews, especially not in English?
513:
164:
101:
97:
477:
448:
575:
337:
316:
40:
431:
393:
179:
503:
370:
356:
558:
529:
525:
495:
466:
435:
421:
397:
374:
360:
342:
321:
301:
247:
175:
62:
571:
553:
291:
36:
384:. The multiple reviews for multiple books now added to the article are enough for a borderline pass of
332:
311:
225:
58:
427:
418:
407:
389:
211:
539:: agree with David Eppstein comments above. I think the sources in the article (eg: Book reviews
366:
352:
124:
413:
76:
29:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
570:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
35:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
549:
517:
491:
462:
385:
280:
243:
191:
53:
234:
Highly promotional and no real independent establishment of notability with secondary
116:
68:
235:
154:
487:
458:
239:
426:
Only one of the three reviewed books is edited. The other two are authored. —
566:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
543:
540:
480:
to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
451:
to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
412:
I am a bit unclear how edited volumes should count towards
150:
146:
142:
210:
486:Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
457:Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
43:). No further edits should be made to this page.
578:). No further edits should be made to this page.
254:Note: This discussion has been included in the
327:Note: This discussion has been included in the
224:
8:
108:Help, my article got nominated for deletion!
329:list of Women-related deletion discussions
326:
253:
7:
502:The user "Amigao" has been publicly
24:
258:lists for the following topics:
93:Introduction to deletion process
18:Knowledge:Articles for deletion
1:
559:09:40, 21 November 2023 (UTC)
530:10:30, 15 November 2023 (UTC)
496:02:40, 13 November 2023 (UTC)
63:12:36, 21 November 2023 (UTC)
467:23:14, 5 November 2023 (UTC)
436:07:12, 9 November 2023 (UTC)
422:13:58, 3 November 2023 (UTC)
398:07:33, 3 November 2023 (UTC)
375:11:35, 4 November 2023 (UTC)
361:10:12, 1 November 2023 (UTC)
343:03:19, 31 October 2023 (UTC)
322:03:17, 31 October 2023 (UTC)
302:23:07, 29 October 2023 (UTC)
248:23:04, 29 October 2023 (UTC)
83:(AfD)? Read these primers!
595:
568:Please do not modify it.
32:Please do not modify it.
260:Academics and educators
165:edits since nomination
81:Articles for deletion
498:
469:
345:
341:
320:
304:
98:Guide to deletion
88:How to contribute
586:
557:
485:
483:
481:
456:
454:
452:
411:
335:
314:
299:
294:
287:
283:
256:deletion sorting
229:
228:
214:
158:
140:
78:
34:
594:
593:
589:
588:
587:
585:
584:
583:
582:
576:deletion review
546:
476:
474:
447:
445:
405:
333:Espresso Addict
312:Espresso Addict
297:
292:
285:
281:
171:
131:
115:
112:
75:
72:
48:The result was
41:deletion review
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
592:
590:
581:
580:
562:
561:
533:
532:
510:
500:
484:
471:
455:
441:
440:
439:
438:
428:David Eppstein
408:David Eppstein
400:
390:David Eppstein
379:
378:
377:
346:
324:
305:
232:
231:
168:
111:
110:
105:
95:
90:
73:
71:
66:
46:
45:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
591:
579:
577:
573:
569:
564:
563:
560:
556:
555:
551:
544:
541:
538:
535:
534:
531:
527:
523:
519:
515:
514:contributions
511:
508:
505:
501:
499:
497:
493:
489:
482:
479:
472:
470:
468:
464:
460:
453:
450:
443:
442:
437:
433:
429:
425:
424:
423:
420:
415:
409:
404:
401:
399:
395:
391:
387:
383:
380:
376:
372:
368:
367:DaffodilOcean
364:
363:
362:
358:
354:
353:DaffodilOcean
350:
347:
344:
339:
334:
330:
325:
323:
318:
313:
309:
306:
303:
300:
295:
290:
289:
288:
277:
273:
269:
265:
261:
257:
252:
251:
250:
249:
245:
241:
237:
227:
223:
220:
217:
213:
209:
205:
202:
199:
196:
193:
190:
187:
184:
181:
177:
174:
173:Find sources:
169:
166:
162:
156:
152:
148:
144:
139:
135:
130:
126:
122:
118:
117:Mable Lu Miao
114:
113:
109:
106:
103:
99:
96:
94:
91:
89:
86:
85:
84:
82:
77:
70:
69:Mable Lu Miao
67:
65:
64:
61:
59:
57:
56:
51:
44:
42:
38:
33:
27:
26:
19:
567:
565:
547:
536:
522:74.211.96.51
475:
473:
446:
444:
402:
381:
348:
307:
284:
279:
233:
221:
215:
207:
200:
194:
188:
182:
172:
74:
54:
49:
47:
31:
28:
198:free images
414:WP:NAUTHOR
55:Ritchie333
572:talk page
518:talk page
386:WP:AUTHOR
382:Weak keep
286:Quidditch
272:Education
37:talk page
574:or in a
478:Relisted
449:Relisted
268:Business
161:View log
102:glossary
39:or in a
550:Timothy
504:flagged
403:Comment
349:Comment
308:Comment
274:, and
264:Authors
204:WP refs
192:scholar
134:protect
129:history
79:New to
488:Daniel
459:RL0919
419:hroest
240:Amigao
176:Google
138:delete
276:China
236:WP:RS
219:JSTOR
180:books
155:views
147:watch
143:links
16:<
554:talk
537:Keep
526:talk
512:The
492:talk
463:talk
432:talk
394:talk
371:talk
357:talk
338:talk
317:talk
244:talk
212:FENS
186:news
151:logs
125:talk
121:edit
50:keep
552:::
548://
226:TWL
159:– (
52:.
542:,
528:)
507:as
494:)
465:)
434:)
396:)
373:)
359:)
331:.
282:WC
278:.
270:,
266:,
262:,
246:)
238:.
206:)
163:|
153:|
149:|
145:|
141:|
136:|
132:|
127:|
123:|
524:(
490:(
461:(
430:(
410::
406:@
392:(
369:(
355:(
340:)
336:(
319:)
315:(
298:✎
293:☎
242:(
230:)
222:·
216:·
208:·
201:·
195:·
189:·
183:·
178:(
170:(
167:)
157:)
119:(
104:)
100:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.