Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Supremely Partisan
It needs two independent reviews to pass , yes? Here's one ''possible'' one, I cannot read the article. https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/books-supremely-partisan-how-raw-politics-tips-the-scales-in-the-united-states-supreme-court-by-james-d-zirin-b9ql3gbc2 Here's another possible one: https://www.law.com/newyorklawjournal/almID/1202768174808/Supremely-Partisan-How-Raw-Politics-Tips-the-Scales-in-the-US-Supreme-Court/?slreturn=20180429032808 I can read this one: https://www.spectator.co.uk/2017/02/how-impartial-is-the-us-judiciary/ And there's a blurb on it here: http://www.abajournal.com/magazine/article/books_polarized_judiciary_politics And that's about it in terms of reviews. I note the sources not in an attempt to show notability, but to show if it passes , it's by a hair. A lot of the sources have the author talking about the book or the topic of the book instead of actually reviewing the book, and the sources that do review the book seem to be British
— User:SportingFlyer, 07:35, 29 May 2018 (UTC)
Stance: delete
Cited policy: WP:BOOKCRIT||WP:BOOKCRIT (Wikipedia:Notability)