Deletion of Darwin's Angel

Comment: It easily meets the criteria at : the article gives links to reviews in major national newspapers, and it seems to be notable enough that Dawkins has written a response to it. So subject meets notability criteria, and the fact that the article may be poorly written or the focus of edit-warring is no grounds for deletion
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:BK)

Comment: I would like to vote delete because this seems like yet another God Delusion parasite, but I don't know how to make a Wikipedia argument to back this up... The  guideline seems satisfied, as this book does have things that are published as reviews in national newspapers
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:BK)

Comment: With Anthony Kenny, there is finally a review that satisfies : "Some of these works should contain sufficient critical commentary to allow the article to grow past a simple plot summary
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:BK)