The result was do not delete, with no consensus between merge and keep positions in this AfD. lifebaka++ 05:54, 15 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Poor sourcing does not establish the notability of this book. Nor is there enough substantial information for an article. Kitfoxxe (talk) 12:21, 5 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Here is a list of the current fully independent sources: [9] a detailed piece by the joong-ang daily on some of the history around the book, [10], a very long and detailed article on the book, [11], [12], two articles specifically about the book and details on it, [13] another lengthy article talking about the book, and the newsis article here [14]. All of these are non-trivial articles written about the book.--Crossmr (talk) 01:20, 7 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]