Talk:Jonathan Lethem

Jonathan Lethem has been listed as one of the Language and literature good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
September 20, 2007	Good article nominee	Listed

This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.

If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.

This article has not yet been rated on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Biography GA‑class

	Biography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
GA	This article has been rated as GA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

New York City GA‑class Low‑importance

	New York City portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject New York City, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of New York City-related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.New York CityWikipedia:WikiProject New York CityTemplate:WikiProject New York CityNew York City articles
GA	This article has been rated as GA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Lethem co-edited PKD's Exegesis

Lethem was the co-editor of Philip K. Dick's Exegesis that was just released. In case you don't know what the Exegesis is, it is PKD's set of personal writings about his philosophical beliefs and visions, especially the vision that he would later write about in VALIS and other books.

It's pretty major point for Lethem's career and I would guess it should be included somewhere, however I don't know exactly where that should be. I don't want to step on any toes and try it myself. 98.223.65.209 (talk) 15:13, 19 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Good article nomination

GA review (see here for criteria)

It is reasonably well written.
a (prose): b (MoS):
It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
It is broad in its coverage.
a (major aspects): b (focused):
It follows the neutral point of view policy.
a (fair representation): b (all significant views):
It is stable.
It contains images, where possible, to illustrate the topic.
a (tagged and captioned): b lack of images (does not in itself exclude GA): c (non-free images have fair use rationales):
Overall:
a Pass/Fail: GreenJoe 15:14, 17 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I noticed the section called "First novels" only has 1 citation for the entire paragraph. I'm putting this on hold until it is fixed. GreenJoe 15:14, 17 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

On another look, the lead needs to be longer too. GreenJoe 00:21, 20 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Next Novel

The article says that Chronic City will be published in September 2009, but the release date on Amazon is October 2009; maybe it's not such a big difference, yet it might be misleading for prospective readers. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.40.118.97 (talk) 18:00, 2 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You are correct--the official publication date has changed, and I confirmed it at the publisher's website [1]. I have changed the date in the article. Thanks for the heads up!--ShelfSkewed Talk 18:32, 2 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

New CC BY Photo

Hi, I just posted a photo of Mr. Lethem under CC BY that I thought might be useful for this article: http://www.flickr.com/photos/fcb/3910765136/ Thanks! Fred Benenson (talk) 21:07, 11 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright problem

This article has been reverted by a bot to this version as part of a large-scale clean-up project of multiple article copyright infringement. (See the investigation subpage) This has been done to remove User:Accotink2's contributions as they have a history of extensive copyright violation and so it is assumed that all of their major contributions are copyright violations. Earlier text must not be restored, unless it can be verified to be free of infringement. For legal reasons, Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions must be deleted. Contributors may use sources as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences or phrases. Accordingly, the material may be rewritten, but only if it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously. VWBot (talk) 05:20, 10 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This bot edit has been reverted as there was no copyvio in this particular edit by User:Accotink2 (the addition of an external link), and the bot's reversion undid productive edits by User:Beyond My Ken.--ShelfSkewed Talk 05:39, 10 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

adrian chen blog snippet re Lethem

Is there any truth to this or not{{http://valleywag.gawker.com/5733878/famous-author-dares-people-to-vandalize-his-wikipedia-entry]] and if there is, should it go on his page ? the flavour of the confirmed stuff on the page is that he holds the opposite view --— Tumadoireacht ^Talk/_Stalk 03:18, 16 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

No. Beyond My Ken (talk) 04:26, 16 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]