Talk:The Immaculate Conception (novel)

Verifiable
The editor who created this page has admitted to doing so on the basis of external sources--has never read or even seen the book. This is a traversty of verifiability. See:

Wikipedia talk:Speedy deletion criterion for unsourced articles

the comment is at the bottom of the rather long section.DGG 17:24, 3 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Reply
 * The specific comment in that long section to which I think you are referring is:
 * "If the book has been written about elsewhere in published works, it qualifies as notable; that's also the requirement that has to be met for Verifiability—that it has been the topic of multiple, reliable, published sources. I drafted an article: The Immaculate Conception based on the references I could find online. I found a fair number of references; I don't have access to the book. It needs work, but I think it's a good stub, at least.—Chidom talk 22:50, 1 December 2006 (UTC)"
 * I don't understand why you categorize this as a "travesty of verifiability". The information in the article is well sourced, which is what Wikipedia requires. Please see Verifiability:
 * "The threshold for inclusion in Wikipedia is verifiability, not truth. "Verifiable" in this context means that any reader should be able to check that material added to Wikipedia has already been published by a reliable source."
 * Since any reader can "check that material added to Wikipedia has already been published by a reliable source" by following the links in the References section, the material is "Verifiable" according to the definition given.
 * The information in the article is gleaned from reading other material about the book that has been published by realiable sources, not the book itself. For me to write an article based on my opinions of the contents of the book would be contrary to No original research.
 * In short, Wikipedia requires reliance upon external sources.
 * Also, I specifically described the article as a stub needing work; please feel free to add sourced material to the article. &mdash; Chidom   talk   07:46, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

Suggested move
I suggest very few peope visiting this article are actually looking for a paperback ranked 1,488,959 on Amazon. Would it not be sensible to move this article to The Immaculate Conception (novel) and to replace this article with a redirect to Immaculate Conception?


 * It is a clear case of WP:SNOW - this is a novel. History2007 (talk) 18:26, 8 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Many thanks. I just changed the redirect so that Immaculate Conception points the same way as The Immaculate Conception--Lo2u (T • C) 20:49, 8 December 2011 (UTC)