Talk:The Exotic Enchanter

WikiProject class rating
This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as start, and the rating on other projects was brought up to start class. BetacommandBot 13:49, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

Note to User:Becritical
This article is not a legitimate target for removal without discussion. Moreover, for an article about a book, the book itself is always a legitimate source, and need not be cited as such; the Internet Speculative Fiction database (listed under external links) is also a legitimate source. Also, please note that if this article was to be removed, the proper redirect would be to L. Sprague de Camp, not Christopher Stasheff. BPK (talk) 06:19, 30 November 2010 (UTC)


 * On the contrary, according to Notability (books) "The book has been the subject[1] of multiple, non-trivial[2] published works whose sources are independent of the book itself." The book has not been sourced to any such.  The author himself is of, at best very marginal notability.  However, I will take your word on the redirect (: BE——Critical __Talk 21:24, 30 November 2010 (UTC)


 * There are two authors under consideration here, not one. Regarding the first, Christopher Stasheff, well, he is a respectable midrange fantasy author - hardly marginal, though I would certainly concede that he's not a major figure. Thus, while I personally would question your wholesale deletion spree among the Stasheff articles, I have not contested it. But his status isn't really an issue in the present case. These two works are a collaboration with an unquestionably major figure: L. Sprague de Camp is universally regarded as a highly important author in the science fiction and fantasy fields, which makes your statement on the notability of the author irrelevant. Moreover, the Harold Shea series, of which these books are a continuation, is a fantasy classic. I submit that the notability of de Camp and the series are unquestioned facts against which your argument carries little weight. If you truly believe these two articles do not merit a place in wikipedia, there is a formal process by which you can contest them. Right now you don't have a consensus - just your own opinion, with which I respectfully disagree. BPK (talk) 14:57, 1 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Okay, sounds good. I'm going through a process where I hope to do as few deletion discussions as possible.  I've found that people argue that a person/subject ought to be notable, and therefore keep the article, even though no one can find any notability in actual fact (sources that meed Notability (books)).  So the discussions are exhausting and I'd rather do things with tacit consensus such as you were willing to give on the redircts (:  So anyway, if I get to articles like this one, I'll get to them last and go through the formal discussion. BE——Critical __Talk 17:38, 1 December 2010 (UTC)