Talk:The Enchanter Reborn
Latest comment: 13 years ago by Becritical in topic Note to User:Becritical
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||
WikiProject class rating edit
This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as start, and the rating on other projects was brought up to start class. BetacommandBot 13:49, 9 November 2007 (UTC)
Note to User:Becritical edit
This article is not a legitimate target for removal without discussion. Moreover, for an article about a book, the book itself is always a legitimate source, and need not be cited as such; the Internet Speculative Fiction database (listed under external links) is also a legitimate source. Also, please note that if this article was to be removed, the proper redirect would be to L. Sprague de Camp, not Christopher Stasheff. BPK (talk) 06:18, 30 November 2010 (UTC)
- On the contrary, according to Wikipedia:Notability (books) "The book has been the subject[1] of multiple, non-trivial[2] published works whose sources are independent of the book itself." The book has not been sourced to any such. The author himself is of, at best very marginal notability. However, I will take your word on the redirect (: BE——Critical__Talk 21:20, 30 November 2010 (UTC)
- L. Sprague de Camp is universally regarded as a highly important author in the science fiction and fantasy fields; Moreover, the Harold Shea series, of which these books are a continuation, is a fantasy classic. I submit that the notability of de Camp and the series are facts against which your argument carries little weight. If you truly believe these two articles do not merit a place in wikipedia, there is a formal process by which you can contest them. Right now you don't have a consensus - just your own opinion, with which I respectfully disagree. BPK (talk) 15:01, 1 December 2010 (UTC)