Talk:The World and Wikipedia

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the The World and Wikipedia article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Books

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Books. To participate in the project, please visit its page, where you can join the project and discuss matters related to book articles. To use this banner, please refer to the documentation. To improve this article, please refer to the relevant guideline for the type of work.BooksWikipedia:WikiProject BooksTemplate:WikiProject BooksBook articles

Wikipedia Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Wikipedia, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's encyclopedic coverage of itself. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page. Please remember to avoid self-references and maintain a neutral point of view, even on topics relating to Wikipedia.WikipediaWikipedia:WikiProject WikipediaTemplate:WikiProject WikipediaWikipedia articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

The following Wikipedia contributor has declared a personal or professional connection to the subject of this article. Relevant policies and guidelines may include conflict of interest, autobiography, and neutral point of view.

Andrew Dalby (talk · contribs) / Dalby, Andrew This user has contributed to the article. This user has declared a connection.

Notability? Merge proposal

Since the page is linked on from the Signpost, I don't want to create drama. However, on what criteria of Wikipedia:Notability (books) is this book notable? I suggest the article be merged with the author's page. --RA (talk) 19:05, 4 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Notable? I'm not sure. I won't edit the text, but I'll add footnotes to a few reviews (which might still be useful if the pages are merged). Andrew Dalby 12:12, 5 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have a feeling that the book will easily meet criteria #1 and probably #4 as well.--Albany NY (talk) 03:00, 10 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose merge. Topic has received coverage in reliable secondary sources. -- Cirt (talk) 17:44, 10 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]