Talk:Jonathan Lethem

message: :GA review (see here for criteria)
#It is reasonably well written.
#:a (prose):  b (MoS): 
#It is factually accurate and verifiable.
#:a (references):  b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR): 
#It is broad in its coverage.
#:a (major aspects):  b (focused): 
#It follows the neutral point of view policy.
#:a (fair representation):  b (all significant views): 
#It is stable.
#:
#It contains images, where possible, to illustrate the topic.
#:a (tagged and captioned):  b lack of images (does not in itself exclude GA):  c (non-free images have fair use rationales): 
#Overall: 
#:a Pass/Fail:  GreenJoe 15:14, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: On another look, the lead needs to be longer too. GreenJoe 00:21, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Good article nomination

message: The article says that Chronic City will be published in September 2009, but the release date on Amazon is October 2009; maybe it's not such a big difference, yet it might be misleading for prospective readers.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.40.118.97 (talk) 18:00, 2 September 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: You are correct--the official publication date has changed, and I confirmed it at the publisher's website . I have changed the date in the article. Thanks for the heads up!--ShelfSkewed Talk 18:32, 2 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Next Novel

message: Hi, I just posted a photo of Mr. Lethem under CC BY that I thought might be useful for this article: http://www.flickr.com/photos/fcb/3910765136/ Thanks! Fred Benenson (talk) 21:07, 11 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  New CC BY Photo 

message: This article has been reverted by a bot to  as part of a large-scale clean-up project of multiple article copyright infringement. (See the investigation subpage) This has been done to remove User:Accotink2's contributions as they have a history of extensive copyright violation and so it is assumed that all of their major contributions are copyright violations. Earlier text must not be restored, unless it can be verified to be free of infringement. For legal reasons, Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions must be deleted. Contributors may use sources as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences or phrases. Accordingly, the material may be rewritten, but only if it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously. VWBot (talk) 05:20, 10 December 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: This bot edit has been reverted as there was no copyvio in this particular edit by User:Accotink2 (the addition of an external link), and the bot's reversion undid productive edits by User:Beyond My Ken.--ShelfSkewed Talk 05:39, 10 December 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Copyright problem 

message: Is there any truth to this  or not[] and if there is, should it go on his page ? the flavour of the confirmed stuff on the page is that he holds the opposite view --— Tumadoireacht Talk/Stalk 03:18, 16 January 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: No. Beyond My Ken (talk) 04:26, 16 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  adrian chen blog snippet re Lethem 

message: Lethem was the co-editor of Philip K. Dick's Exegesis that was just released.  In case you don't know what the Exegesis is, it is PKD's set of personal writings about his philosophical beliefs and visions, especially the vision that he would later write about in VALIS and other books.
It's pretty major point for Lethem's career and I would guess it should be included somewhere, however I don't know exactly where that should be.  I don't want to step on any toes and try it myself. 98.223.65.209 (talk) 15:13, 19 November 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I'll include it, but it's hardly a "major point for Lethem's career". Beyond My Ken (talk) 01:17, 20 November 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: If you want to know why I don't directly contribute to articles look at the statement above. One can't write anything without getting a snarky remark.  Lethem edited the papers of a major writer of the 20th century.  Seems pretty major to me.  You can keep the snark to yourself. 98.223.65.209 (talk) 23:05, 21 November 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorry you took it as snark, it was meant to be matter-of-fact. Lethem himself is a significant writer of the 21st century, which is much more important than editing another writer's papers -- especially since only scholars are Dickheads (like myself) are going to read the Exegesis.  It's most definitely a niche publication. Beyond My Ken (talk) 23:35, 21 November 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Lethem co-edited PKD's Exegesis

message: *Oppose. The proposal makes no sense.  As seen in the proposer's comment on Talk:Dissident Gardens, it is based on the erroneous idea that the article is still frozen in its pre-publication write up, which had been an incompetent cut-and-paste from this article. Choor monster (talk) 15:14, 20 May 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: The (malformed) merger proposal has been up for a week, without a single reason offered for why it should be made, by the proposer or anyone else.  I've taken the liberty of reverting the proposal, not just "closing". Choor monster (talk) 12:56, 27 May 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Dissident Gardens]] merger proposal

message: I have commenced a tidy-up of the Bibliography section using cite templates and tables for short stories, poems and/or book reviews. Capitalization and punctuation follow standard cataloguing rules in AACR2 and RDA, as much as Wikipedia templates allow it. Feel free to continue. Sunwin1960 (talk) 03:29, 19 August 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bibliography