Talk:Christopher Booker

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I question (A) the notability of this person in a general purpose encyclopedia, and (B) NPOV. Phrases like "published ... to critical acclaim" read like press releases or publicity blurbs and not neutral POV articles. Editing it to read "some critics acclaimed it, and other critics dismissed / criticized it" which would be both more accurate and more neutral still wouldn't get at the question of whether or not Mr. Booker is "notable". For instance, is he a "Published authors, editors and photographers who received multiple independent reviews of or awards for their work" or "The person has been the primary subject of multiple non-trivial published works whose source is independent of the person. (Multiple similar stories describing a single day's news event only count as one coverage.)" or has he "made a widely recognized contribution that is part of the enduring historical record in their specific field"? -- LQ 16:15, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

I do not question the notability of the person, given his extensive career and apparent critical status, but I do question whether it is necessary to list every one of his publications. It may be more sensible to detail just the ones he is best known for, for example The Neophiliacs: A Study of the Revolution in English Life In The Fifties and Sixties and The Seven Basic Plots: Why We Tell Stories. -- Stratman07 (talk) 04:28, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

This article must adhere to the policy on biographies of living persons. Controversial material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted or if there are other concerns relative to this policy, report it on the living persons biographies noticeboard.