Talk:By-Line: Ernest Hemingway

Notability

Dear Mccapra,
Thank you for your interest in the present article, which you recently tagged with the {{notability}} template. At your convenience, please would you help me understand how it fails the notability guidelines for books, when it already meets criterion #1 thanks to two reviews, one each in Time (magazine) and The New York Times?

The book has been the subject[1] of two or more non-trivial[2] published works appearing in sources that are independent of the book itself.[3] This can include published works in all forms, such as newspaper articles, other books, television documentaries, bestseller lists,[4] and reviews. This excludes media re-prints of press releases, flap copy, or other publications where the author, its publisher, agent, or other self-interested parties advertise or speak about the book.

Since this criterion is met, I would also contend there is no compelling requirement for more citations either, however desirable they may well be. Therefore, I would appreciate it if you would consider removing the templates you inserted. Thank you.
With kind regards;
Patrick. ツ Pdebee.^{(talk)(become old-fashioned!)} 07:39, 18 August 2020 (UTC)
PS: I see from your user page that you have access to JSTOR, which I don't. I would be most grateful if you would therefore add a citation each for this review by Robert O. Stephens, and also this one by Bernard S. Oldsey using the following {{cite journal}} templates I prepared for you.
Very many thanks for your consideration.
With kind regards;
Patrick. ツ Pdebee.^{(talk)(become old-fashioned!)} 10:04, 18 August 2020 (UTC)

References

• Stephens, Robert O. (February 1968). "Reviewed Work: By-Line: Ernest Hemingway" (text). College Composition and Communication. 19 (1). Manchester: National Council of Teachers of English: 64–65. doi:10.2307/355242. JSTOR 355242. Retrieved August 18, 2020 – via jstor.org. {{cite journal}}: Invalid |ref=harv (help)
• Oldsey, Bernard S. (October 1967). "Reviewed Work: By-Line: Ernest Hemingway" (text). The Journal of General Education. 19 (3). University Park, Pennsylvania: Penn State University Press: 239–243. JSTOR 27796085. Retrieved August 18, 2020 – via jstor.org. {{cite journal}}: Invalid |ref=harv (help)

Thanks @Pdebee: The reason for adding the tag was that the sourcing seems to rely heavily on what the book’s editor himself had said, two other refs is the absolute minimum to meet WP:NBOOK and I can’t access the Time review so wasn’t sure how extensive it was. Anyway the new refs you’ve suggested certainly mean it comfortably passes the notability threshold so I’ll take the tag off and add the refs in when I have time (I’m travelling at the moment). All the best Mccapra (talk) 17:47, 18 August 2020 (UTC)

Dear Mccapra,

Thank you very much for your prompt and supportive response, and for agreeing to remove the tag prior to augmenting the article with these two additional citations, whenever convenient to you. Please know that I appreciate your cooperation, as together we will improve the article further. This case also reminds me that I must look into how to apply for access to JSTOR, as it would make me more productive in finding reliable sources. Again, thank you, and please keep well and stay safe in your travels.

With kind regards for now;
Patrick. ツ Pdebee.^{(talk)(become old-fashioned!)} 21:29, 18 August 2020 (UTC)

Dear Mccapra,
Just to let you know that I have now added the two above entries in a newly created Further reading section in the subject article. I hope it will make it easier for you to use these in due course, whenever you have the time to consult the two JSTOR reviews and integrate their useful points into the article, for additional evidence of notability, as discussed above. Please know that I appreciate your collaboration, whenever convenient; thank you once again for your helpful assistance.
With kind regards;
Patrick. ツ Pdebee.^{(talk)(become old-fashioned!)} 15:45, 23 August 2020 (UTC)