Deletion of Latter-day Saint Biographical Encyclopedia

Comment: I'd say the work probably falls under . It probably wouldn't hurt to have better crosslinking between the articles for the book and its author, and a clarifying crosslink to the article about Comprehensive History of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints|CHC, but the page for the other book should definitely not be merged with this one... the authors may have interacted or even collaborated, but they were different people
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:OLDBOOK)

Comment: as suggested by {{u|Deaddebate}} above, even if used as a  in other articles, and is "interesting", with no available references of its own a standalone is not warranted
Stance: merge
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Reliable sources (WP:RS)

Comment: Unless I am missing something, this appears to satisfy  due to reprints (including microforms), which are an indicator of the level of circulation, the fact that it must have circulated widely because the local branches got a copy, the level of coverage and historical importance. Reprinted by eg SUP Memorial Foundation, 1955; Western Epics, 1971; Greg Kofford, 2005. Microforms by eg the one listed https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=e5qg2L6hATcC here. A search for "Saint Biographical Encyclopedia"+jenson+1901+microform does bring up some coverage in GBooks. https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=SW1bAAAAMAAJ This calls the book a standard work. (The publishers, UGA, say on their website they are '''not''' affiliated with the LDS church, even if that was an issue for a book not actually published by the church
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:OBK)

Comment: oops, forgot about |Ye olde booke (coola now thinking of all the old books in their hoard collection that can be put on WP:)), a thankyou to the above editors, have changed from a "merge
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:OLDBOOK)