Talk:The Flamethrowers (Kushner novel)

Novels Low‑importance

	Novels portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Novels, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to novels, novellas, novelettes and short stories on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and contribute to the general Project discussion to talk over new ideas and suggestions.NovelsWikipedia:WikiProject NovelsTemplate:WikiProject Novelsnovel articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Women writers Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women writers, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of women writers on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Women writersWikipedia:WikiProject Women writersTemplate:WikiProject Women writersWomen writers articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Contested deletion

This page should not be speedy deleted as an unambiguous copyright infringement, because... (your reason here) -- The Flamethrowers is among the year's best-received novels; the cover review in the 11 July 2013 New York Review of Books ("This Book Has Heat"), called "frequently dazzling" by Cristina Garcia in the New York Times Book Review; James Wood in The New Yorker describes it as "scintillatingly alive." It's an important work that merits an entry.Mthwaite (talk) 04:28, 21 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The problem was that the article contained the synopsis on the book jacket. While I wish we could use those as it'd make creating the plot section a little easier, it's still technically copyvio. As far as the book's importance, we have to show that by way of coverage in reliable sources. I've done that, but just saying it's notable and not fully sourcing it doesn't always guarantee that an article will be kept. It'd have been nice if it'd been fixed and sourced rather than immediately nominated for deletion, but you can't guarantee that every editor will do that. In any case, the article is quite safe from deletion now. BTW, if you've read the book then I'd be very grateful if you could write a synopsis for the article. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 08:53, 21 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

That was great stuff, TG79. And great of you to take the time. What I still don't entirely get is why Worldcat -- the jacket copy source -- can make use of the text but Wiki cannot. It's text the pubs hope will be distributed. But anyway. As a Wiki user, it's a pleasure to now read the entry. Mthwaite (talk) 13:27, 23 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]