It's just getting stupid now.
I know it. You should see the last deletion discussion:
- The chapter in the book doesn't count because anybody can publish a book.
(That's true, but this book was from a long-established publisher in the computer tech field. I have several of their programming books on my shelf now.)
- Ok, but this book of interviews of social-media-using-tech-people seems far from that area. It does not seem that they have any demonstrated competence in publishing this sort of book.
(But their 'people in tech" series [I think it is called] already has a lot of other books in it. This suggests an editorial process to develop and publish such books. It's
not new to them.)
- But this is the author's first book. We can't rely on it.
GAWD! It must get tiring for them, carrying those goalposts around like that.
It's going to go to "articles for deletion" where there will be an extended discussion. The "rules
uber alles" people will cite
the rules I've stated. I can't win at trying to convince that the article content meets the rules.
But in the AFD discussion, with more people involved, I'm going to appeal to a provision at the top of that page: it is best treated with common sense, and occasional exceptions may apply." I am going to argue that the preponderance of mentions we have is enough to establish notability even though the strict terms of the guideline are not met. And if that fails that'll be the end of it. I don't have much hope, since WP is full of SJ-types (Meyers-Briggs term) for whom the rules are somewhere higher up than god.
But, if it's deleted I'm going to request a copy so I can continue to improve it. I actually have a draft of the article converted to be about EEVblog. Although the notability rules for "web content" are really much the same as the ones for people they are enforced much less rigidly.
David needs to ask someone at the SMH to do a full-length article on him and on EEVblog. NOT an interview, since "interviews are primary sources." But per the strict rules, we'd still need another one. Maybe David has other contacts in the industry press (online or otherwise) who could be persuaded to write something similar.