This article is within the scope of WikiProject Wikipedia, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's encyclopedic coverage of itself. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page. Please remember to avoid self-references and maintain a neutral point of view, even on topics relating to Wikipedia.WikipediaWikipedia:WikiProject WikipediaTemplate:WikiProject WikipediaWikipedia articles
This article was copy edited by Bsoyka, a member of the Guild of Copy Editors, on 7 March 2022.Guild of Copy EditorsWikipedia:WikiProject Guild of Copy EditorsTemplate:WikiProject Guild of Copy EditorsGuild of Copy Editors articles
Latest comment: 2 years ago7 comments2 people in discussion
It is massively problematic to refer to Wikipedia editors as "prominent and expert Wikipedians". This kind of self-congratulatory puffery is contrary to our commitment to neutrality. Vexations (talk) 15:30, 14 November 2021 (UTC)Reply
can not cut out list of contributors, can only display it differently, as I did initially
hm...I am not native speaker to know fineses well, however he is not approving it, but considering that he is co-founder and activly involved it is relevant that he finds it a good effort in making such publication reflecting on past 20 years
maybe this was not clear - but non-essential...
I am not agreeing here, but I do not mind it being modified.
As for notability, I think book is fairly notable considering it was published by MIT Press and got a review in Science mag. Maybe it is not the next book bestseller, but for sure is not in 10% of least notable books that already have EN Wikipedia pages. -- Zblace (talk) 19:41, 14 November 2021 (UTC)Reply
@Vexations I just review it and though those individual arguments do not stand as enough, together they point to notability... Never the less I added more both here and in Wikidata, so let us see what others think. Good night from Croatia! --Zblace (talk) 20:25, 14 November 2021 (UTC)Reply