Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/How Rude!

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. --Coredesat 06:05, 27 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

How Rude![edit]

How Rude! (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) - (View log)

Non-notable in my opinion. The article does give a link to one book review in education week, but that's not enough for me. YechielMan 02:20, 14 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• This AfD nomination was incomplete. It is listed now. DumbBOT 14:46, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. Google search looks notable enough. Doczilla 09:00, 22 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached
 Please add new discussions below this notice. Thanks, If you have any questions, please contact me at my talk page. Ian Manka 05:41, 22 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Strong keep This series of books has plenty of Amazon reviews. —siroχo 09:49, 22 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep, notable book, with many relevant Google hits. Terence Ong 12:47, 22 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep notable book series. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 16:32, 22 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep per discussion at hand. --Dennisthe2 17:07, 22 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep Not enough? Well, it's enough for me :) Alex43223 ^{Talk | Contribs | E-mail | C} 04:51, 23 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - Seems noteworthy to me. - Peregrine Fisher 01:19, 25 January 2007 (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.