Talk:The Sandman Companion

Merge
Is this book notable enough to stand on its own? I think it could be merged with Sandman (Vertigo), or used as a reference for that article. joshschr ( Talk  |  contribs ) 15:41, 24 January 2008 (UTC)


 * It was tagged as a requested article in comics - I can't imagine that it wouldn't be notable, frankly. It was quite a big deal when it came out, is widely cited in articles on the series, and it should be easy to find substantial reviews of it. Phil Sandifer (talk) 16:28, 24 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Do you have any of these citations? Those would make the article much easier to defend and much more meaningful, even if it were eventually merged.--Doug.(talk • contribs) 00:10, 25 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Not handy - though I can tell you that it's routinely cited in stuff from the next issue of ImageTexT that we're putting out (which is a special issue on Gaiman). Try Google Scholar. Phil Sandifer (talk) 01:24, 26 January 2008 (UTC)


 * I didn't plan on spending any more time on this article, but here goes. I do not own this book.  I am a big fan of Gaiman's body of work, and Sandman was my first introduction to it; however, this book seems like nothing more than a reference.  From what I've seen from google (I haven't checked google scholar), it is a collection of interviews with Gaiman about Sandman that enhances the reader's understanding of the series.  I do not know why it would warrant its own article, but I understand that it would be an invaluable resource in fleshing out the Sandman (Vertigo) article.  I have not read WP: Notability, I do not plan to contribute to the article other than protecting it from vandals and some minor copy-edit suggestions.  My problem is, and I'm sure this has been resolved elsewhere, is every reference worthy of its own article?  joshschr  ( Talk  |  contribs ) 02:25, 26 January 2008 (UTC)


 * It does need expanding but it could potentially be worth an entry. (Emperor (talk) 22:31, 1 March 2008 (UTC))