Talk:Darkwalker on Moonshae

Notability
Please stop that! I have had the entry redirected twice already?!? Is this vandalism or censorship? That the entry isn't perfect yet is no reason to destroy it. Wikipedia is full of book stubs anyway! And already there's been for a very long time at least one other entry for a book by Douglas Niles. Are you going to redirect that too? I'm waiting to see... I'm TRYING(!) to CONTRIBUTE(!) to EXPAND(!) Wikpedia! Isn't it what Wikipedia is about?! It's just a book I believe deserves its own entry, I'm not giving it the Nobel prize! Am I at the wrong FREE encylopedia? And to think that I've just registered to CONTRIBUTE... --Valsinats (talk) 09:15, 14 January 2008 (UTC)


 * I'm inclined to agree with Valsinats. I'll say that the assertion that it's the first Forgotten Realms novel is enough to give it a claim of notability. If we come back in a week and it's still this bare-bones, then a redirect would be in order, though. —C.Fred (talk) 00:31, 14 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the support! I want to say that the book deserves an entry not only because it's the first Forgotten Realms book, but also because it's a good one - quite better than some of the more famous examples of the fantasy genre. But do I need to keep watch on it every week? I would think that Wikipedia is a community effort - I've done something to contribute, be it small, and maybe some other fan of books AND Wikipedia will do some more. But what if it's not in a week's time, or even a month's? So, let's destroy every stub! I've started an entry before (Kuber) - it was a short thing, but people improved it and now it's quite OK.


 * I've been a huge fan of Wikipedia for a long time, and have even argued with people about its value. But what happened to my tiny effort with this entry was really disappointing...


 * And to the re-Directors, I'm sorry to be impolite, but please watch the ego. --Valsinats (talk) 09:17, 14 January 2008 (UTC)


 * The problem is that quality, in a subjective sense, is not a valid reason for a book to have an article. That said, if the book is well-written enough to get many reviews, then the volume of media coverage will act to demonstrate its notability. I don't agree that it's the best way to determine which subjects get articles, but it's one of the more objective ways.


 * And yes, a week is an arbitrary amount of time. My point was that, if nothing else, some sources can be located in a week, which would give other editors material on which to improve the article. If we go a week and can't turn any sources, then it's a sign that maybe the book isn't notable after all. —C.Fred (talk) 01:20, 14 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Longinus said that the sublime and beautiful is liked always, and by everyone (unfortunately, I really don't know the procedure of putting sources in), so I understand what you mean by media attention. However, what is in the media is usually new books that need attention (quite naturally), rather than older books of, let's say, similar quality. But anyway, I believe that the original idea was Wikipedia to be a grass-roots project for knowledge; community and individual-driven, rather than by the media and for the media. --Valsinats (talk) 10:12, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
 * By the way, Google returned 5,730 results for Darkwalker of Moonshae, if that means something... --Valsinats (talk) 09:17, 14 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Avoid that argument; see WP:GHITS. --Jack Merridew 09:35, 14 January 2008 (UTC)


 * To C.Fred; The assertion of what it is amounts to an assertion of notability — Establishment of Notability requires the usual significant coverage in reliable independent sources. I will pop back here next week or so and see what's happened. --Jack Merridew 09:35, 14 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Having honestly no idea how citing sources is done, I've just included external links. I'm aware that putting there a commercial website might be problematic, but I've done it for the comments about the book. If anybody objects to that as third-party reference, remove it. --Valsinats (talk) 09:56, 14 January 2008 (UTC)


 * I reworked one of the externs to use - you should use that format; there are others such as . I'm not sure if that is an appropriate site to use; I didn't look to closely. See WP:EL and WP:SPS for guidance. --Jack Merridew 10:21, 14 January 2008 (UTC)