Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Anthony M. Esolen
Has anyone argued that doing a translation of a great work conveys notability and gets a  warning?  I don't think so.  But a great, and critically praised, translation of a work (great or not), is notable.  One looks for reviews of the translations to see whether this is true or not, as Jpacobb suggests, and they are there in spades.  JSTOR: reviews of his Tasso translation in the top journals of the field: ''Translation and Literature'': "offers a great deal...excellent notes" (by Barbara Reynolds; a superstar of the opposite translation tradition), ''International Journal of the Classical Tradition'': "Esolen easily supplants the...competition; his is a highly readable translation with considerable narrative drive and a good deal of local vigor and interest", ''Sixteenth-Century Journal'': "Because Esolen takes such care to make the text accessible, he offers an excellent introduction to Tasso for new generations of readers, and he succeeds in awaking an interest in the original Italian, as well as in all ofTasso's works, with this translation." Reviews of his Lucretius, Spenser, and Dante abound -- there's not time to read all the praise for Esolen in them.  But just suffice to say that The Modern Library chose his translation of the Divine Comedy for their series -- this is not in any way a minor press, but the kind of extremely highly regarded publisher that has the money and reputation to attract the best and most notable of translators
— User:Mscuthbert, 02:14, 28 September 2012 (UTC)
Stance: keep
Cited policy: WP:INHERIT (Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions)