Talk:Taisha Abelar

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Literary hoaxes?[edit]

I don't see any reason why this article is in the category literary hoaxes. Perhaps there's a very good reason, but it does not seem to appear in the article. Phiwum (talk) 00:46, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

Because there is no evidence the purported house of Don Juan mentioned or Don Juan Matus himself existed, and the stories told often contradict themselves. Sticky Parkin 02:42, 9 November 2008 (UTC)
Perhaps so, but it strikes me as odd to put it in the category and not discuss these allegations in the article. It's rather like putting Leonard Nimoy in the category Jewish Americans without mentioning his Jewish heritage in the text. (Actually, it's much more confusing than that. Most entries in the category of literary hoaxes are literary hoaxes. Taisha Abelar is not a literary hoax. She is a person.)
I suggest that the text be edited to at least mention that some people believe her book is a hoax. Phiwum (talk) 15:32, 9 November 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for your comments Phiwum. There are a lot of author articles that carry the category of literary hoaxes, so there must be a lot of editors that consider it acceptable. Anyhow, I've added a comment to the article as you suggested. Mmyotis (^^o^^) 20:21, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

Not notable.[edit]

I don't understand why this author has a Wikipage.

I find nothing notable enough to warrant inclusion in an encyclopedia. Also: Ref [1] leads to a 'hatchet' article which is primarily about a friend of the author and this referenced article uses unsubstantiated, unreliable and self-published data as its primary sources.

There is only one other source of reference, which is a book by Amy Wallace. Were I a cynic, I might think that the only reasons for the writing and posting of this article were to publicize Wallace's book and the previously-mentioned unsubstantiated Ref [1] article.

This page should be deleted. 2.98.196.255 (talk) 01:28, 27 November 2014 (UTC)

Edit- NB I shall remove the 'External Links' section which has two unreliable sources: 1) 'Publishers' Weekly' which is a pay-for-review book promotion site; 2) 'Sustained Action', a self-published website. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.98.196.255 (talk) 01:34, 27 November 2014 (UTC)