Talk:The Jesus Puzzle

Why is the notability of this work in question?

The mythicist theory is a controversial but highly important approach to the origins of Christianity and the historicity of Jesus. This book is considered the premier work arguing for the mythicist view of Jesus. How is the top book in a field that has received much attention and debate not considered notable? No reasons for this tag were put forward in the discussion page, so I take this to be a cheap smear tactic akin to graffiti. Please remove the tag. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Ian1985 (talk • contribs) 11:27, 18 May 2007 (UTC).

The notability is in question because (a) the book is self-published, which is typically considered a warning sign that a book might be non-notable, and (b) no evidence has been given that this attention and debate exists. Please point to examples that have been published in reliable sources, as is required by the policy Wikipedia:Notability (books) that is linked in the tag. JulesH 16:07, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

This book should be considered notable as per criterion 1 of the policy for which I have provided abundant references in the External Links section of the article.

The book is actually an expansion of an article that first appeared in the 4/2 (Fall 1997) issue of a peer reviewed journal called Journal of Higher Criticism. It has been reviewed by Richard Price in "Unpacking Christ's case" Free Inquiry Buffalo: Summer 2002. Vol. 22, Iss. 3; pg. 66, by Frank R. Zindler in "The Christ Myth Revisited" American Atheism vol. 39, no. 1 (Winter 2000-2001), pp. 43-45.

A quick look through Google scholar reveals that Jesus Puzzle is mentioned in several books and articles including on in a foreign language. Another search this time through Google books shows "Jesus Puzzle" Doherty producing one fiction book and four pages of non-fiction books with 10 books to a page (admittedly there is some chaff in with the wheat but it shows that the book is not obscure in any rational sense of the word).--BruceGrubb (talk) 20:42, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:The Jesus Puzzle.jpg

Image:The Jesus Puzzle.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 09:55, 21 January 2008 (UTC)