i have posted nothing on the article page as this would presumably be a conflict of interest and have made here suggestions of the way in which the book may be used only because requested my view remains that it should be done by an editor who does not have coi i think that now we've moved on from the efforts to exclude a source through wrong application of the notability guidelines we're left with neutrality of point of view as the main issue wikipedia reports what is out there and a decision to exclude entirely from an article an appropriate source which has a view on much that is in the article as well as topics the article excludes appears to be a bias the idea that the only book of lit crit on beedle the bard has nothing whatsoever to add to an encyclopaedia article on the topic is incredible i don't think coin is central to the issue as it now stands rather the central issue is npv i think there are wider issues which it would be interesting to discuss for example had my username not been essentially my real name a post on the talk page a year ago saying hi guys this book exists and has something to say about the article would not have generated this negative discussion i suggest medcab is a way forward because it can consider all issues while coin considers only one issue and probably one which is not central