Talk:Dauðans óvissi tími

Notability
The notability of this entry has been questioned by User:Sadads. But I'm not sure why, as the entry lists six independently published reviews. Thus it obviously meets the first of these criteria: A book is notable if it verifiably meets, through reliable sources, at least one of the following criteria: I'd suggest the notability flag can summarily be removed. Alarichall (talk) 09:34, 20 September 2017 (UTC)
 * 1) The book has been the subject of two or more non-trivia published works appearing in sources that are independent of the book itself. This includes published works in all forms, such as newspaper articles, other books, television documentaries, bestseller lists, 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.
 * 2) The book has won a major literary award.
 * 3) The book has been considered by reliable sources to have made a significant contribution to a notable or significant motion picture, or other art form, or event or political or religious movement.
 * 4) The book is, or has been, the subject of instruction at two or more schools, colleges, universities or post-graduate programs in any particular country.
 * 5) The book's author is so historically significant that any of the author's written works may be considered notable. This does not simply mean that the book's author is notable by Wikipedia's standards; rather, the book's author is of exceptional significance and the author's life and body of written work would be a common subject of academic study.
 * The problem is that the article doesn't actually demonstrate any of these.... The lead, and the rest of the article don't actually indicate a signficant amount of literary reviews/coverage, nor suggest that its a winner of any awards. Sadads (talk) 20:46, 20 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Only one of the criteria is required for notability, so the lack of awards isn't an issue. The section entitled 'reviews' is surely a pretty clear indication of a significant amount of reviews (namely six, which is more than the two required for notability). Where relevant, the reviews are also cited in footnotes in the header and the section on style, so I'm not sure why you think that other parts of the article don't indicate coverage. Anyway, would it help if we added a sentence like 'it has been widely reviewed in a number of independent publications' to the header? Seems unnecessarily clunky to me, but I'd like you to be happy with it. Alarichall (talk) 01:26, 21 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Since these points haven't been gainsaid, I've taken the liberty of removing the notability tag. Hope that's okay! Alarichall (talk) 16:10, 30 October 2017 (UTC)